The claims made by the union are more persuasive. The reason being that-: the counterclaims made by the company are malicious and not in any way reflected by the actions of the union. The unions’ claims are clear and can be traced to every action the members of the union undertook. The union argues that its members have been repeatedly interrogated by the company and actually this is true. This is evident from how Larry Melton kept interrogating Ewing, Gloria and Thompson pestering them to update him on any developments regarding the unions’ activities.
The employees were also on numerous accounts threatened that they were going to loose the various privileges they have been receiving. This includes Melton’s threats on Thompson that he had a good job and that his involvement in the activities of the union would jeopardize his position in the company. Another threat issued is that of the Leo on Cecil that the helpers of janitors risked loosing the apartments that were rented for free if the union lost the election, and that they were going to charge heads of the janitors for every second bedroom in their apartments.
The maintenance supervisor is also on record to have threatened the employees if they were not going to reveal the names of those who have joined the union. Larry Melton constantly repeated his threats insisting that they were going to relinquish their various positions in the company if they joined or participated in any activities of the union.
It is also on record that the employees had on numerous incidences been told that the management was aware of their involvement in the activities of the union. This amounts to violation of employee rights.
The company also in a meticulously thought out scheme introduced a new package to the employees at the time election was near. The company introduced a new health and sickness scheme. This was meant to lure the employees to withdraw their support for the union. This can be interpreted to mean that the company harbored the intentions of manipulating the employees at the expense of their rights.
b. Was the statement by Nord to Snow on the date of the representational election a threat or a legitimate prediction and personal opinion protected by the free speech provisions of the act? Why, or why not?
In one sense it is legitimate. However, it’s coming at the time the company was about to hold its representational election. The fact that Nord was mentioning it to Snow, company employee, at that time was meant to intimidate and threaten him and other employees of the company. His statement could not be taken to mean that it was personal; it represented the position of the company given that he was a supervisor.
c. Was the company obligated to accept the union? ��S majority status claim on the basis of the authorization cards submitted by the union? Explain your answer.
Yes, the company was obligated to accept the majority status of the union. This was because-: the bearers of the cards were the employees of the company and that they were the members of the union. Authorization cards allowed individual employee to participate in the representational election of the company and that the employees, who now are the members of the union, are the majority. The company could not therefore deny the legitimacy of the authorization cards.
d. If the company is found to have violated the act, what would be the appropriate remedy: a bargaining order or a new election? Explain your answer.
A bargaining order, the reason being that-: a new election would not impact much on the needed changes than a bargain. The janitorial employees were going to enter into an agreement with the company on how various issue relating to and affecting them were to be fulfilled. This also was going to set ground for an agreement with the union. This in turn was going to put on toes the company on ensuring that the employee rights were respected to the latter.
e. Should Castulon Corporation establish a drug-testing program? If so, recommend a specific policy for the program that includes disciplinary procedures for dealing with employees who test positive for drug use.
Yes. Castulon Corporation should role out a plan for testing drug abuse. If the responses presented by the company staff were anything to go by I would propose that the company use the gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy test. This is because it is cheap, and it will cost the company less money in administering the test. The test results are not going to be manipulated incase of second test.
The company should ensure that every employee who is recruited into the company undergoes the test. The corporation should also ensure that the serving company employees should always undergo the test. This should be a routine. This way the company is going to monitor the habit more closely.
The company should also establish a rehabilitation program to ensure that those found to have engaged in drug abuse or tested positive are restored back to sanity. This way the company is not going to loose valuable employees.
f. What are the most difficult challenges facing an organization in establishing a drug-testing program? Discuss.
The most critical issues that the company is facing in establishing a testing program are-: the legality of the program and the employee trust.
The program was going to contravene the employee individual rights on searching him or her without a probable cause. The employee trust on the company was going to be jeopardized a factor that may lower the productivity of the employees. This also, was going to interfere with the relationship the company staff and other employees are enjoying.
g. Some observers assert that, since alcohol abuse is more prevalent in the workplace and its effects are just as costly, companies should also test for alcohol use. Do you agree? Explain.
Yes I agree. It as been assumed by many people that alcohol effects are less likely to impact negatively on an individual, however on the contrary, alcohol addiction is even worse. It not only affects ones’ health but it also lower ones’ productivity. It is this reason that I support the company’s decision to carry out test on alcohol use.
Lies, M. A. (2008). Preventing and managing workplace violence: Legal and Strategic
Guidelines. Chicago: IL: American Bar Association.
Miner, J. (1975). The challenge of managing. Philadelphia: Saunders.
Sanders, P., & Myers, S. (2005). Drinking Alcohol (Choices and Decisions). NewYork: