Labor Relations Hw 2
HW 2: pg. 116-117 Q’s 1-3 (due Apr.5th)
1. As arbitrator, what would be your award and opinion in this arbitration?
My award and opinion as an arbitrator would be to be in accordance with the union’s position. The grievant could have committed any type of irresponsible actions or any discrepancies, there is no way to prove it, and the fault for setting up such system where the guilty cannot be proven was made by the employer. Therefore, in this case, the grievant does not belong inside the circumference of “just cause” because the employer did not set up a proper boundary that makes the application of “just cause” standard apprehensible.
In my opinion, the employer now has learned what kind of discrepancies can occur and modify the security issues regarding the remaining medications. Any discrepancies occurred after a “just” modification of the rules shall be applied strictly as intended by the employer.
2. Explain why the relevant provisions of the collective bargaining agreement as applied to the facts of this case dictate the award.
I think that it is very natural and obvious that the employer, who is in charge of his company, wants to charge someone of any discrepancy occurred inside his boundaries. Even if there is no exact proof existing, the employer believes that each supervisor must be responsible for their actions and be willing to accept the consequences that come from their own subdivision’s control.
For example, let’s say there was a small bug inside a potato chip bag. The bug could have got inside the bag in any process during which the potato chip was being made, but the employer must decide one of the suspicious departments for the discrepancy. Let’s say that the employer fired the supervisor of the final packaging division. Even though all packaging is done by machines and the only daily duty of the packaging division is to identify wrong-packaged bags, the employer has made a decision.
1. As arbitrator, what would be your award and opinion in this arbitration?
My award and opinion as an arbitrator would be to be in accordance with the union’s position. The grievant could have committed any type of irresponsible actions or any discrepancies, there is no way to prove it, and the fault for setting up such system where the guilty cannot be proven was made by the employer. Therefore, in this case, the grievant does not belong inside the circumference of “just cause” because the employer did not set up a proper boundary that makes the application of “just cause” standard apprehensible.
In my opinion, the employer now has learned what kind of discrepancies can occur and modify the security issues regarding the remaining medications. Any discrepancies occurred after a “just” modification of the rules shall be applied strictly as intended by the employer.
2. Explain why the relevant provisions of the collective bargaining agreement as applied to the facts of this case dictate the award.
I think that it is very natural and obvious that the employer, who is in charge of his company, wants to charge someone of any discrepancy occurred inside his boundaries. Even if there is no exact proof existing, the employer believes that each supervisor must be responsible for their actions and be willing to accept the consequences that come from their own subdivision’s control.
For example, let’s say there was a small bug inside a potato chip bag. The bug could have got inside the bag in any process during which the potato chip was being made, but the employer must decide one of the suspicious departments for the discrepancy. Let’s say that the employer fired the supervisor of the final packaging division. Even though all packaging is done by machines and the only daily duty of the packaging division is to identify wrong-packaged bags, the employer has made a decision.