HRIR 3450 FINAL PREPARATION
TEST QUESTIONS WITH ALL
CORRECT ANSWERS
Friendly Tires: In your opinion, is the management team for Friendly Tires only engaged
in "hardball tactics" as discussed in this chapter? Use an example to support your
viewpoint. - Answer-Management is engaged in two hardball tactics. One being that
management is lowballing the union. Management is doing this by providing very low
concessions for employees. They are proposing to completely eliminate the uniform
allowance and provide very low wage increases. With the success of the firm, it is fair to
say they have the funds to increase these but are giving the union low numbers in
hopes they can avoid paying the fund increases they know the union wants. They are
also playing chicken by contacting the employees instead of the union to add pressure
on the union to agree to their terms. This makes it so the union has less power to
bargain with.
In reviewing the excerpt from the December 21 management memo to union members,
do you interpret the content of the correspondence as likely to cause employees to feel
intimidated or threatened? Explain why or why not. Do you believe an unfair labour
practice complaint by the union would be upheld before the Labour Relations Board?
Share your views with other members in the class - Answer-I do not think employees
will feel out-right threatened or intimidated by the management. Management does not
threaten to lay anyone off or to close any plants, but they may create some worry in
employees by saying they want to avoid negative future consequences. This may make
employees fear for their job security in the future. I think a complaint will still be filed to
the Board and upheld. It will be upheld because the business is doing well and is
successful meaning, they can afford to increase their employees pay and maintain or
even increase uniform allowances.
Plaza Fiberglas: Is there any basis for the union to file a complaint with the Labour
Relations Board? Refer specifically to each of the following items: rules, seniority,
wages, addresses of employees and the hiring of employees to work at the new
location. - Answer-There is a basis for the union to file a complaint to the Labour
Relations Board. The union could file a grievance based on the hiring of employees to
work in a different location because management did not bargain in good faith. The
union can claim that because the management lied to them and said they would not be
relocating operations when they were planning to, this was not bargaining in good faith.
This shows that the company was concealing important information needed for
negotiations and they were being deceptive. They could also file a grievance in regard
to management rejection of their seniority and employee information request that the
, management is refusing to justify their bargaining position. They are just turning down
things without actually considering them.
What remedies could the Board order for any violations of labour relations legislation by
the employer? - Answer-The Labour Relations Board can order a cease-and-desist to
management to resume the bargaining, this time in good faith. The Board can also help
the parties in negotiations of the new collective agreement. The Board may also order
the management to compensate the union for all of the additional expenses they had to
incur because of managements breach of duty.
A collective agreement between a hospital and the union contained the following:• a
management rights article• a provision regarding contracting out that provided: "12.01.
The Hospital shall not contract out any work usually performed by members of the
bargaining unit if, as a result of such contracting out, a layoff of any employees other
than casual part-time employees results from such contracting out"• a technological
change article that provided for notice to the union for technological change plus notice
to employees who might be laid off. The hospital proposed adoption of a new food
preparation system that would involve food being assembled elsewhere by an outside
company. The final preparation would be done at the hospital using new equipment that
would be installed. The system was similar to one used in the airline industry and
involved a $5.5 million investment. If the new system was adopted some hosp - Answer-
The union could challenge this on the basis that the hospital is contracting out the food
prep. If this job was done by full-time employees, it would go against the collective
agreement because it would be replacing the job of people in the bargaining unit. This
would also not be considered "business as usual" so the union could have a likely case
to win. The union could also argue the hospital is not giving them notice about the new
technology change.
Assume you were an employer representative. On what basis might the employer
defend the plan? - Answer-Management will say it is new technology so as long as they
give the employees notice it is okay to do.
If you were an arbitrator dealing with this situation, what would your decision be? -
Answer-Arbitrator will side with the union because the job was contracting out which
goes against the collective agreement.
A collective agreement included the following articles:(a) "If the Union fails to submit a
grievance at each level in the grievance procedure within the time limits stipulated in
this article, the grievance shall be deemed abandoned. Similarly, if the Corporation fails
to reply to a grievance in writing within the time limits stipulated in this article, the
grievance maybe referred to the next level of the grievance procedure, including
arbitration."(b) "After exhausting the provisions of the grievance procedure, either of the
parties may notify the other party in writing within thirty (30) days of the final level reply,
of its intention to submit a grievance to arbitration."The employer discharged an
employee and a grievance was filed on his behalf by the union. The grievance went
though the steps in the grievance procedure and the union received the reply from the
TEST QUESTIONS WITH ALL
CORRECT ANSWERS
Friendly Tires: In your opinion, is the management team for Friendly Tires only engaged
in "hardball tactics" as discussed in this chapter? Use an example to support your
viewpoint. - Answer-Management is engaged in two hardball tactics. One being that
management is lowballing the union. Management is doing this by providing very low
concessions for employees. They are proposing to completely eliminate the uniform
allowance and provide very low wage increases. With the success of the firm, it is fair to
say they have the funds to increase these but are giving the union low numbers in
hopes they can avoid paying the fund increases they know the union wants. They are
also playing chicken by contacting the employees instead of the union to add pressure
on the union to agree to their terms. This makes it so the union has less power to
bargain with.
In reviewing the excerpt from the December 21 management memo to union members,
do you interpret the content of the correspondence as likely to cause employees to feel
intimidated or threatened? Explain why or why not. Do you believe an unfair labour
practice complaint by the union would be upheld before the Labour Relations Board?
Share your views with other members in the class - Answer-I do not think employees
will feel out-right threatened or intimidated by the management. Management does not
threaten to lay anyone off or to close any plants, but they may create some worry in
employees by saying they want to avoid negative future consequences. This may make
employees fear for their job security in the future. I think a complaint will still be filed to
the Board and upheld. It will be upheld because the business is doing well and is
successful meaning, they can afford to increase their employees pay and maintain or
even increase uniform allowances.
Plaza Fiberglas: Is there any basis for the union to file a complaint with the Labour
Relations Board? Refer specifically to each of the following items: rules, seniority,
wages, addresses of employees and the hiring of employees to work at the new
location. - Answer-There is a basis for the union to file a complaint to the Labour
Relations Board. The union could file a grievance based on the hiring of employees to
work in a different location because management did not bargain in good faith. The
union can claim that because the management lied to them and said they would not be
relocating operations when they were planning to, this was not bargaining in good faith.
This shows that the company was concealing important information needed for
negotiations and they were being deceptive. They could also file a grievance in regard
to management rejection of their seniority and employee information request that the
, management is refusing to justify their bargaining position. They are just turning down
things without actually considering them.
What remedies could the Board order for any violations of labour relations legislation by
the employer? - Answer-The Labour Relations Board can order a cease-and-desist to
management to resume the bargaining, this time in good faith. The Board can also help
the parties in negotiations of the new collective agreement. The Board may also order
the management to compensate the union for all of the additional expenses they had to
incur because of managements breach of duty.
A collective agreement between a hospital and the union contained the following:• a
management rights article• a provision regarding contracting out that provided: "12.01.
The Hospital shall not contract out any work usually performed by members of the
bargaining unit if, as a result of such contracting out, a layoff of any employees other
than casual part-time employees results from such contracting out"• a technological
change article that provided for notice to the union for technological change plus notice
to employees who might be laid off. The hospital proposed adoption of a new food
preparation system that would involve food being assembled elsewhere by an outside
company. The final preparation would be done at the hospital using new equipment that
would be installed. The system was similar to one used in the airline industry and
involved a $5.5 million investment. If the new system was adopted some hosp - Answer-
The union could challenge this on the basis that the hospital is contracting out the food
prep. If this job was done by full-time employees, it would go against the collective
agreement because it would be replacing the job of people in the bargaining unit. This
would also not be considered "business as usual" so the union could have a likely case
to win. The union could also argue the hospital is not giving them notice about the new
technology change.
Assume you were an employer representative. On what basis might the employer
defend the plan? - Answer-Management will say it is new technology so as long as they
give the employees notice it is okay to do.
If you were an arbitrator dealing with this situation, what would your decision be? -
Answer-Arbitrator will side with the union because the job was contracting out which
goes against the collective agreement.
A collective agreement included the following articles:(a) "If the Union fails to submit a
grievance at each level in the grievance procedure within the time limits stipulated in
this article, the grievance shall be deemed abandoned. Similarly, if the Corporation fails
to reply to a grievance in writing within the time limits stipulated in this article, the
grievance maybe referred to the next level of the grievance procedure, including
arbitration."(b) "After exhausting the provisions of the grievance procedure, either of the
parties may notify the other party in writing within thirty (30) days of the final level reply,
of its intention to submit a grievance to arbitration."The employer discharged an
employee and a grievance was filed on his behalf by the union. The grievance went
though the steps in the grievance procedure and the union received the reply from the
