Class Member Responses (200 word min) - 4 responses needed (Need back today)
sirjay
ClassMemberDiscussionTopicResponses_case10.2.docxClass Member Discussion Topic Responses
Grading Criteria
You are required to respond with depth, breadth and insight to the discussion question(s) as well as one of your class members. Your response to the discussion question(s) must be tied back to the chapter material and outside research is expected. When I ask you to support your answer, you are expected to combine opinion with, minimum 2, citations, insight from your experiences, observations of others experiences, analysis of the facts/information and a conclusion. PLEASE do not limit your citations to just the book! Find other supporting material outside of the class structure. You are also required to answer the question posed by the instructor and class members’. (Please note: The guidance outlined above will contribute to you “meeting the expectations” for the discussion. Additional participation will contribute to a grade that will “exceed the expectations” for the discussion
The combined original reply and two responses are worth up to 20 points per student. The criteria used to determine the point distribution will be:
|
Original Reply: |
10 points |
|
Initiated Peer Reply (2): |
8 points |
|
Uses of sources: |
2 points |
Cite examples, textbook material, or your own supporting material to back up your opinion.
Action: Read the below peer discussion board posts and provide your classmate with feedback on your opinion of their position. Do you agree and why? Do you disagree and why? Replies to your class members’ are intended to move the discussion forward. Telling them that they simply did a good job is not acceptable. Statements like "I feel", "I believe" and/or "I think" are difficult to measure and, highly, subjective. Asking a question or two about the position they took will move the discussion forward. Replies are 200 word minimum
Peer Reply #1
Case Study 10-2: Unfair Labor Practice By a Union
by Frank
The Union in this case violated labor practice laws during an election by use of intimidation. While union did not directly order members to harass, abuse, or intimidate employees who wish to vote against the union, they sure did not condemn the actions or encourage members to not act in such a way. In fact, the ninth point brought up was not only racially charged but also put forth an aggressive message by the union towards those who imposed them.
If the union wished to stopped this behavior, they should have encourage a more safe and open forum for those opposed to the them, by instructing members to reframe from projecting hostility to their co-workers whom may vote no. They should immediately condemn any actions of intimidation. The union should finally warn members of consequence of such actions to deter behavior.
If I were an arbitrator, I would rule that this election was invalid because of the unions unfair labor practices that muffled the voice of those that opposed them. Even if the union did not direct the action, they never condemned it, and their tolerance and racially rhetoric led to a hostile environment that was used to discourage those from voting against the union.
Peer Reply #2
Unfair Labor Practice By a Union
How could the union have stopped individuals from the intimidating actions that allegedly went on in this case? Support your answer.
At the two union organization meetings mentioned, rather than the disparaging comments that were made towards the Japanese leadership of the Company, a union official could have instead said something like, "I have been hearing about quite a few instances where folks are complaining of threats and intimidation from union members. I'm here to say, Knock it off! A dishonest win isn't what we want and that's not what we stand for." ... Something along those lines to make sure the members know that any rowdy and uncalled for behavior is not supported by the Union and that the Union does not stand for it.
The Union could have also sent out communications or put up flyers and posters that also echo those sentiments. It is, in fact, the Union's responsibility to speak up and speak out. Those members carrying out the intimidation tactics believe they are acting for and on behalf of the union, believing their actions to be encouraged and backed with Union support. This is most certainly an unfair labor practice, as it violates rights that the Statute protects. (“Unfair Labor Practice | FLRA,” n.d.) "The National Labor Relations Act forbids employers from interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of rights relating to organizing, forming, joining or assisting a labor organization for collective bargaining purposes, or from working together to improve terms and conditions of employment, or refraining from any such activity. Similarly, labor organizations may not restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of these rights." (“Employer/Union Rights and Obligations | NLRB | Public Website,” n.d.)
Lastly, if the alternate speech above was given, but still not adhered to, "If an employer or a union commits an ULP, the Board must order the guilty party to cease and desist from the illegal behavior." (“Unfair Labor Practices (ULPs),” n.d.)
...After all, sometimes it takes this kind of thing to get the point across.
Class Member Discussion Topic Responses
Grading Criteria
You are required to respond with depth, breadth and insight to the discussion question(s) as well as
one of your class
members. Your response to the discussion question(s) must be tied
back to the chapter material and outside research is
expected. When I ask you to support your answer, you are expected to combine opinion with, minimum 2, citations, insight
from your experiences, observations of others experiences, analysis of the facts/
information and a conclusion.
PLEASE do
not limit your citations to just the book!
Find other supporting material outside of the class structure.
You are also
required to answer the question posed by the instructor and class members’. (Please note: The gu
idance outlined above will
contribute to you “meeting the expectations” for the discussion. Additional participation will contribute to a grade that wil
l
“exceed the expectations” for the discussion
The combined original reply and two responses are worth
up to
20 points per student. The criteria used to
determine the point distribution will be:
Original Reply:
10
points
Initiated Peer
Reply (2):
8
points
Uses of sources:
2 points
Cite examples, textbook material, or your own supporting material to bac
k up your opinion.
Action:
Read the below peer discussion board posts and provide your classmate with feedback on your opinion of their
position. Do you agree and why? Do you disagree and why?
Replies
to your class members’ are intended to move the
discussion forward. Telling them that they simply did a good job is not acceptable. Statements like "I feel", "I believe" and
/or "I
think" are difficult to measure and, highly, subjective. Asking a question
or two about the position they took will move the
discussion forward
.
Replies are 200 word minimum
Peer Reply #1
Case Study 10
-
2: Unfair Labor Practice By a Union
by
Frank
The Union in this case violated labor practice laws during an election by use of intimidation. While union did not directly
order members to harass, abuse, or intimidate employees who wish to vote against the un
ion, they sure did not
condemn the actions or encourage members to not act in such a way. In fact, the ninth point brought up was not only
racially charged but also put forth an aggressive message by the union towards those who imposed them.
If the union w
ished to stopped this behavior, they should have encourage a more safe and open forum for those
opposed to the them, by instructing members to reframe from projecting hostility to their co
-
workers whom may vote
no. They should immediately condemn any actio
ns of intimidation. The union should finally warn members of
consequence of such actions to deter behavior.
If I were an arbitrator, I would rule that this election was invalid because of the unions unfair labor practices that muffle
d
the voice of those th
at opposed them. Even if the union did not direct the action, they never condemned it, and their
tolerance and racially rhetoric led to a hostile environment that was used to discourage those from voting against the
union.
Class Member Discussion Topic Responses
Grading Criteria
You are required to respond with depth, breadth and insight to the discussion question(s) as well as one of your class
members. Your response to the discussion question(s) must be tied back to the chapter material and outside research is
expected. When I ask you to support your answer, you are expected to combine opinion with, minimum 2, citations, insight
from your experiences, observations of others experiences, analysis of the facts/information and a conclusion. PLEASE do
not limit your citations to just the book! Find other supporting material outside of the class structure. You are also
required to answer the question posed by the instructor and class members’. (Please note: The guidance outlined above will
contribute to you “meeting the expectations” for the discussion. Additional participation will contribute to a grade that will
“exceed the expectations” for the discussion
The combined original reply and two responses are worth up to 20 points per student. The criteria used to
determine the point distribution will be:
Original Reply: 10 points
Initiated Peer Reply (2): 8 points
Uses of sources: 2 points
Cite examples, textbook material, or your own supporting material to back up your opinion.
Action: Read the below peer discussion board posts and provide your classmate with feedback on your opinion of their
position. Do you agree and why? Do you disagree and why? Replies to your class members’ are intended to move the
discussion forward. Telling them that they simply did a good job is not acceptable. Statements like "I feel", "I believe" and/or "I
think" are difficult to measure and, highly, subjective. Asking a question or two about the position they took will move the
discussion forward. Replies are 200 word minimum
Peer Reply #1
Case Study 10-2: Unfair Labor Practice By a Union
by Frank
The Union in this case violated labor practice laws during an election by use of intimidation. While union did not directly
order members to harass, abuse, or intimidate employees who wish to vote against the union, they sure did not
condemn the actions or encourage members to not act in such a way. In fact, the ninth point brought up was not only
racially charged but also put forth an aggressive message by the union towards those who imposed them.
If the union wished to stopped this behavior, they should have encourage a more safe and open forum for those
opposed to the them, by instructing members to reframe from projecting hostility to their co-workers whom may vote
no. They should immediately condemn any actions of intimidation. The union should finally warn members of
consequence of such actions to deter behavior.
If I were an arbitrator, I would rule that this election was invalid because of the unions unfair labor practices that muffled
the voice of those that opposed them. Even if the union did not direct the action, they never condemned it, and their
tolerance and racially rhetoric led to a hostile environment that was used to discourage those from voting against the
union.
