Case Study on "Labor Management Relations"

Case Study 3 pages (1299 words) Sources: 2

[EXCERPT] . . . .

grievance process an effective method for resolving workplace disputes?

The dispute between Swallows and Green illustrates why a grievance process established by a collective bargaining agreement is not always an effective method for resolving workplace disputes. The legal duties established by federal labor law do not give non-union employees the right to participate in remedial procedure, such as a grievance process, that is created for union employees by a collective bargaining agreement. While a collectively bargained grievance process can be an effective tool for effectively resolving disputes between employers and unionized employees, it does not do anything to help non-union employees because unions do not have a legal duty to give the same procedural rights to individuals who are not a part of the bargaining unit.

Green's allegation that the union breached its duty of fair representation raises a question about the scope of duties imposed upon a union when it addresses disputes through a grievance process. The primary source for those duties is the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the employer. The secondary source of those duties is federal labor law, including the National Labor Relations Act, the Labor Management Relations Act, and other related legislation. Because federal law does not create any duties for a union to include non-union employees in its grievance process, a non-union employee can look to the grievance process for redress only when the collective bargaining agreement (or an employer's own workplace policy) specifically provides that non-union employees have the same access to the grievance process as their union counterparts. See IBM Corp., 341 NLRB No. 148 (2004). Of course, in many situations, neither an employer nor the union will have any incentive to extend rights created by a collective bargaining agreement to individuals who are not part of the bargaining unit.

With respect to the dispute between Green and Swallows, it appears from the facts of the case that the collective bargaining agreement did not include any provisions under which Green would have a right to file a grievance and to have her grievance heard by the union. Similarly, there is no information to suggest that the union had exclusive control over the disciplinary process, a circumstance under which the union would have a duty to represent Green in the same way that it represented Swallows. IBM Corp. Accordingly, the union simply had no duty to formally take a grievance from Green or to consider it in the same way that it considered Swallows' grievance.

Green's response to the way in which the grievance process was conducted shows why there can be a perception of unfairness in a workplace environment where union and non-union employees work side-by-side with slightly different sets of rights. Green apparently believed that she had a right to participate in the grievance process because, when she asserted that she wanted to file a grievance, no-one told her that she could not do so. Moreover, when union officials were considering Swallows' grievance, they testimony from Green, confirming her belief that she was participating in the process as a grievant with her own claim and not just as a witness in connection with a union employee's claim. Given her involvement in the process, and given the failure to inform her of her rights by both the union and the employer, it is no wonder that Green believed that her interests had not been protected or the union had failed to act on her behalf. And Green's perception of unfairness was exacerbated by the fact that Swallows' complaints about the employer's disciplinary action were redressed by the grievance process while her own complaints were not.

This situation shows that disputes between employees cannot be effectively resolved by the grievance process alone when the process is reserved for union employees and when the dispute involves non-union as well as union employees. Employers must have specific policies to supplement… READ MORE

How to Reference "Labor Management Relations" Case Study in a Bibliography

Related Papers:

Labor / Management Relations Do You Feel Case Study

Labor / Management Relations

Do you feel that the labor relations system, as currently constituted, is good for effectively resolving disputes? What are the system's strengths and weaknesses? How would… read more

Case Study 5 pages (1774 words) Sources: 2 Topic: Management / Organizations

---

Human Resources Labor/Management Relations Which Events Case Study

Human Resources

Labor/Management Relations

Which events do you feel were most important in shaping the labor relations system? Do you feel that earlier events from the nineteenth-century still have an… read more

Case Study 4 pages (1251 words) Sources: 2 Topic: Career / Labor / Human Resources

---

Problems Facing Management Term Paper

Management Problems

Dealing With Current Human Relations Problems

Leadership failures occur most frequently because of ineptness, the inability to catch up with development requirements or simply because of a wrong… read more

Term Paper 10 pages (2860 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Management / Organizations

---

Management Theories of Likert, Blake and Mouton Term Paper

Management Theories of Likert, Blake and Mouton, Vroom and Yetton, and Kuhnert and Lewis

Purpose of the Paper

Management Theories of Likert

Management Theories of Blake and Mouton

Management Theories… read more

Term Paper 6 pages (2432 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Management / Organizations

---

Labor Unions Labor Union Is a Representative Term Paper

Labor Unions labor union is a representative group that can bargain with management on such diverse issues as wages, working conditions, relations, and even health care coverage. They can also… read more

Term Paper 3 pages (881 words) Sources: 4 Style: APA Topic: Management / Organizations

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>