Question : Case 15.3 Wear and Tear a large manufacturer with about : 1346387

Case 15.3

Wear and Tear is a large manufacturer with about 250 employees. At the moment, they are in new contract negotiations with their union. Cole, the firm’s labor relations specialist, is heading the negotiations for management. Natalie is labor’s representative.

Cole doesn’t know if he likes working with Natalie. He was able to make her predecessor agree to his terms whenever they negotiated contracts. Natalie is tougher to deal with. She tends to emphasize what bad things can happen to Wear and Tear and to him if her point isn’t granted.

Negotiations have been going on for several days. Cole tells Natalie that if they will accept wage concessions, the company will give employees stock to compensate for the loss in wages. Natalie declines the offer and is unwilling to negotiate further. She reminds him that the contract expires in two days and that the workers will strike if they don’t have a new contract by that time.

81) Refer to Case 15.3. Cole’s negotiating strategy with Natalie’s predecessor was most likely based on:

A) distributive bargaining.

B) bad faith negotiations.

C) integrative bargaining.

D) bargaining power.

82) Refer to Case 15.3. Which labor relations strategy is Natalie most likely using?

A) a distributive bargaining strategy

B) an integrative bargaining strategy

C) a union acceptance strategy

D) a bad faith bargaining strategy

83) Refer to Case 15.3. Cole’s negotiating strategy with Natalie is most likely:

A) a distributive bargaining strategy.

B) one based on bargaining power.

C) an integrative bargaining strategy.

D) a union acceptance strategy.

84) Refer to Case 15.3. Cole’s offer of stock for wage concessions is an example of what type of bargaining topic?

A) permissive

B) illegal

C) integrative

D) mandatory

85) Refer to Case 15.3. Natalie’s refusal of Cole’s offer and of further negotiations is most likely:

A) illegal under the Wagner Act.

B) an example of bargaining power.

C) illegal according to the Landrum-Griffin Act.

D) an impasse and legal because of the type of bargaining topic involved.

Case 15.4

Demetry is the president of a candle manufacturing company. He has heard that employees are considering trying to unionize. He is concerned about this and calls a meeting of upper-level managers and the HR department. Demetry wants to know what can be done in order to discourage a union. He is also concerned about the steps employees will take in unionizing. Demetry knows relatively little about unions. He started the company in his workshop for fun, and it grew into a business that he feels he can no longer control.

Kaia, a production manager, strongly believes that the employees will manage to unionize and wants to identify areas where the company would be able to give-and-take during the bargaining. She suggests that the company discuss benefits for retired union workers.

Karsten, an HR employee, also believes that the union will take hold. He suggests that Demetry not fight unionization and not coerce employees out of their support for the union. Karsten claims that showing such restraint may lead to a more harmonious and cooperative relationship between management and the union.

86) Refer to Case 15.4. Karsten would most likely explain to Demetry that at least ________ of the employees must sign an authorization card before a union certification election can occur.

A) 15%

B) 30%

C) 45%

D) 60%

87) Refer to Case 15.4. Which of the following is a true assessment of Kaia’s benefits proposal?

A) The bargaining topic is mandatory and will be discussed in bargaining.

B) The bargaining topic is illegal and cannot be discussed during bargaining.

C) The bargaining topic is permissive and can be discussed if both sides agree.

D) Bargaining topics should be focused on company politics rather than economic issues.

88) Refer to Case 15.4. Karsten most likely believes in a strategy of:

A) union avoidance strategy.

B) union substitution strategy.

C) union acceptance strategy.

D) union suppression strategy.