2
Case Study: Ethical Union and Management Behavior Assignment
This case study revolves around the labor relations at Win-Dixie stores, particularly the
crucial role of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union as the authorized bargaining
agent within the stores. The focus is on the ongoing negotiation for a new bargaining agreement,
as the previous agreement, which was in effect until February, has expired (Budd, 2021, p. 261).
In this case study, Win-Dixie proposed a wage increase of 56 to 81 cents per hour for its
warehouse workers who had not received an increase in the past 18 months (Budd, 2021, p. 261).
The case study did not cite that this was part of a pattern or regularly scheduled wage increase.
According to case law, this would have been legal if this had been part of a regularly scheduled
wage increase or annual Cost of Living (COL) increase. Here is an excerpt from a ruling
between the Gray Line bus company and the Amalgamated Transit Union in Washington DC in
1974 wherein a similar situation occurred, “By granting unilateral merit raises and cost-of-living
increases in wages to individual employees and groups of employees in said unit, Respondent
has failed and refused to bargain collectively with the Union as exclusive bargaining agent of
employees in said unit, and also interfered with, restrained, and coerced employees in the
exercise of rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the Act, including the right to join, assist,
or bargain collectively through a labor organization of their choosing, thereby engaging in unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 8(a)(5) and (1) and 2(6) and
(7) of the Act” (National Labor Relations Board [NLRB], 1974, Conclusions of the Law (4)
section).
So, in proposing the increase during negotiations it could be concluded that Win-Dixie
was not bargaining in good faith. However, had Win-Dixie been providing COL wage increases
3
annually, and this raise was part of an annual increase. Win-dixie could have proceeded forward
without possibly violating NLRB regulations.
In the case study, Win-Dixie sent a letter to the Union on April 8th. This letter was the
wage increase proposal, but the union rejected it in a letter back to Win-Dixie on April 17th.
According to the case study, the union sent a letter to Win-Dixie on April 25th requesting dates
for collective bargaining. (Budd, 2021) In the letter sent to the union on May 3rd, the company
included two proposals for wage increases, which were rejected by the union as the union wanted
to negotiate for not only wage increases but pension, hospitalization, and other fringe benefits.
During subsequent negotiations, the bargaining issues were reiterated, but no further action was
taken until Win-Dixie advised the union it was moving forward with the wage increases. In the
case study, it doesn’t appear that each party negotiated an impasse.
What is an impasse? An impasse can be described as “a negotiation in which one or two
parties discontinue the interaction, either because one or both parties prefer no agreement, or
because they could not reach an agreement despite them benefitting from doing so”
(Schweinsberg et al., 2021, para. 2).
So, from the union perspective, “The unilateral change for wages of employees
represented by the union violates Sections 8(a)5 and 8(a)1 of the NLRB” (Budd, 2021, The
Union's Position section). From the perspective of Win-Dixie, “A unilateral change in wages or
working conditions by an employer during negotiations, in the absence of an impasse, does not
per se establish a failure of the duty to bargain” (Budd, 2021, The Company's Position section).
4
As an administrative law judge, I would need to review case law and review prior rulings
issued by the courts and the NLRB. Previously, I cited one example of a case reviewed between
Gray Line bus company and the Amalgamated Transit Union. However, more recently the
NLRB ruled in the case of Metro Man IV, LLC d/b/a Fountain Bleu Health and Rehabilitation
Center, Inc. (07-CA-264407; 372 NLRB No. 37) where the Fountain Bleu Health and
Rehabilitation Center, “unilaterally increased wages and used non-unit employees to perform
bargaining unit work in response to conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic in the
Respondent's nursing home that presented an extraordinary and unforeseen imminent threat to
human life that required the Respondent to take immediate action” ("NLRB Issues Decisions for
Week of Dec. 27-30. (2023, Jan 07)," 2023, p. 1). In this ruling, the NLRB reversed an
Administrative Law Judge’s ruling that the care home violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1). The unit
was excused from bargaining but not excused from bargaining about its after-effects once the
emergency was over. In the case of Win-Dixie, it can be said that raising the workers' wages was
not done in the aftermath of a health emergency, hurricane, or natural disaster with which this
new president covers. So, this would not apply.
However, since the 1980s, the NLRB’s rulings have made it easier for employers to reach
an impasse and implement their final offers. (Dannin & Wagar, 2000) The employer stated that it
wanted to provide a pay raise and continue to bargain on the issues the union had put forth. I
would concede that on the issue of the pay raise the parties have reached an impasse as the
union; in this case, since the union refused to negotiate on this raise after several attempts by the
employer.
5
I am reminded of several passages when I consider what Biblical scriptures could be
infused into the wage negotiations. We can also use Biblical guidance in all of our daily
negotiations. Here are five Biblical principles you can use to put together win-win negotiations,
start with the other, put justice first, see the other person’s side, share your passion, and plan
ahead. (Diamond, 2010) “Lord, help me keep egotistical desires out of the picture, and keep me
from selfishness. Help me regard others as better than myself, and keep me from thinking of my
own agenda” (A Modern Translation, 2014, Philippians 2:3). This is starting with the other
person. We must also put justice first, and we find, “Then, I shall not be shaken, and my
righteousness shall be remembered forever” (A Modern Translation, 2014, Psalm 112:5). In the
middle we should put the other person first, “Lord, I’ll not spend all my time thinking of myself,
I will be conscious of other people and do what is best for them” (A Modern Translation, 2014, 1
Corinthians 10:24). Next to the last thing is to share your passion, “The whole Bible was written
by Your inspiration, and it is useful to teach me Your truth, and points out what is wrong in my
life, helping me do what is right” (A Modern Translation, 2014, II Timothy 3:16). Finally, we
need to plan ahead, “Don’t begin following Me until you have counted the cost. No one begins
building a house without first determining the cost of the materials and labor and if he has
enough to complete the projects” (A Modern Translation, 2014, Luke 14:28). Making plans
ahead of time prior to carrying out negotiations is wise. No one will fault you for ever saying that
you must review everything and get back to them.
6
References
A Modern Translation (E. L. Towns & R. B. Zuck, Eds.). (2014). Liberty University Press.
Budd, J. W. (2021). Labor relations.
Dannin, E., & Wagar, T. (2000). Impasse and implementation—how to subvert the national labor
relations act. WorkingUSA, 4(2), 73–90. Retrieved April 16, 2024, from
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-4580.2000.00019.x-i1
Diamond, S. (2010). Getting more: how you can negotiate to succeed in work and life. The
Crown Publishing Group. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/liberty/detail.action?
docID=6067091
National Labor Relations Board. (1974, February 15). Gray Line, Inc. and Local Division 1138,
Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO. Case 5-CA-6144 [.pdf]. NLRB. Retrieved April
18, 2024, from https://www.nlrb.gov/case/05-CA-006144
NLRB Issues Decisions for Week of Dec. 27-30. (2023, Jan 07). (2023). Targeted News Service,
1. Retrieved April 19, 2024, from https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?
url=https://www.proquest.com/wire-feeds/nlrb-issues-decisions-week-dec-27-30/
docview/2761514284/se-2
Schweinsberg, M., Thau, S., & Pillutla, M. M. (2021). Negotiation impasses: Types, causes, and
resolutions. Journal of Management, 48(1), 49–76. Retrieved April 17, 2024, from
https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063211021657
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
