HR1100 Discussion Post 3, Fall 2019

-

1.     The specific actions the Union would likely point to as evidence of an unfair labour practice:
·       Managers asked employees what issues and concerns they had about the organizing campaign.
·       Black advised employees not to sign union cards.
·       Private meetings with employees to question them about the union.
·       Roberts violated legislation when he told his employees that the company would not operate with a union and certification would lead to closure of the store.
·       Distributing a brochure that violated legislation in multiple ways:
                                                    i.     Threatening to hire and train new employees if the union takes them on strike.
                                                  ii.     Telling the employees there would be a strike if the union gets in.
                                                iii.     Using threatening or intimidating wording and tone that was not neutral.
These actions constitute interfering with the formation and administration of a train union. Employers cannot use fear or intimidation tactics to manipulate employees into staying out of a union. They cannot ask about the internal affairs of a union, meet in private with individuals or small groups to discuss the union, and you cannot suggest that there would be job losses if a union was implemented.
2.     The Employers would likely argue that their practices did not offend the Act, and that they were expressing their opinion without threats or promises. This, however, could be argued to be untrue as there are opportunities where aggression and coercion could be detected in their brochure. They would assert that they are within their legal rights to tell employees what it costs to join a union and to communicate the costs associated with unionization. However, it will likely be found that this company used excessive intimidation and coercion which significantly impacted the employees’ freedom of association and the ultimately avoided the formation of the union.
3.     The Labour Relations Board would very likely rule against the Employers in this case. The behaviours listed in question 1 indicate very real violations of the Labour Relations Act. Section 23, 24 and 25 prohibits employer interference with or participation in the formation or administration of a trade union, prohibits discrimination against employees for union involvement, and prohibits threats and intimidation.
4.     What recommendations would you provide, if you were an external consultant hired by the company, to address how it handles future union organizing campaigns? In other words, what recommendations do you have for the Employer in handling its responses to union organizing and communication for the next time?
First and foremost, hire a lawyer. If you are unaware of the legal requirement and restrictions in this dynamic, you need to seek legal counsel. Do not say or do anything to employees regarding the union until you are informed on your legal responsibilities.
Be transparent. Host company-wide open communication sessions where you can express, within your legal rights, your views candidly. Do not avoid this conversation, but ensure you are prepared to handle it without emotional interference; with calmness and tact.
Communication is very important, but what is more important is how you communicate. Follow the Labour Relations Act guidelines in any publications and oral communications. You can express your opinions if it is free from intimidation or coercion. You can emphasize positive aspects of working for the employer, but do not promise pay increases or promotions if the union does not get in. You can advise employees of union fees and encourage employees to get union promises in writing.
Overall, it is important to address the possibility of unionization with an open, objective, and fair approach. Try to view it as an opportunity to open up conversations with employees about important organizational issues and to have people’s voices heard. Being oppositional or difficult to communicate with will only further exasperate an already hostile or contentious situation. Be co-operative and respectful of employees’ rights to form a union without fear of intimidation or coercion, and accept it as an inevitable process which your company will have to learn how to effectively navigate to stay competitive and build a strong workforce.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Honesty and Humanness

-
Orientation:  You are about to give an orientation session to new employees and you plan to stress ethical behaviour as outlined in a company brochure. You know that company executives have recently been convicted in a foreign country of bribing government officials. Will you mention this? Training : During a training program, which requires taking tests to measure progress, you notice that one of the participants, who struggled in some early tests, suddenly submits tests without mistakes. She is a probationary employee. You notice too that she is dating a staff member in your department, who has access to the test solutions. What do you plan to do? Orientation As outlined in the Canadian Code of Conduct for professional behaviour, “ if you are a supervisor you are expected to: set an example by your own behaviour, be open and available to discuss concerns, and ensure that all employees under your supervision are familiar with the Codes. By creating the proper environme...
Read more

Case Study, HRM

-
Co-authored by Linda Brown and Lesley Brake.  Introduction The purpose of this report is to investigate the claims of sexual harassment made by Veronica Scarlett and to provide agreeable solutions to this issue for both Ms. Scarlett and Oakmont & Associates. We will state Devlin Brighton’s behaviours and explore how his actions meet the criteria for sexual harassment. This report will also show how the organizational culture, policies, and practices of Oakmont & Associates have contributed to the behaviour that has allowed the sexual harassment to occur. Most importantly, we will provide a list of solutions that will satisfy both Veronica Scarlett and Oakmont & Associates. This report is from the view point of a human resource management company, Elle Bee HR Consultants, who have been contracted to investigate and resolve this issue. Although the details provided are from an American firm in 2015 we will analyze this issue by current day Canadian standards to bet...
Read more

Section from my Organizational Behaviour textbook

-
Basic Principles of Effective Communication Let’s consider some basic principles of effective face-to-face communication. 68 Take the Time Good communication takes time. Managers in particular have to devote extra effort to developing good rapport with employees. Not taking adequate time often leads to the selection of the wrong communication medium. One of your authors has seen a “don’t do this” memo sent to 130 employees because two of them committed some offence. Of course, the memo irritated 128 people, and the two offenders really did not grasp the problem. The boss should have taken the time to meet face to face with the two people in question. Be Accepting of the Other Person Try to be accepting of the other person as an individual who has the right to have feelings and perceptions that may differ from your own. You can accept the person even if you are unhappy with something that he or she has done. Having empathy with others (trying to put yourself in their place an...
Read more