Description
ULP Group Discussion
After reading Dilts, D. (2007). Case 15: Discharge for disruptive conduct, or for protected Union activity?, your group should come to a consensus as to the issues involved (i.e., critical issues: Is it a ULP? Why or why not?). You can include a dissenting opinion for this case if you cannot achieve a consensus.
Submit that consensus in a brief group essay (500 word minimum).
- Were company rules No. 18 and 29 in violation of NLRA?
- Employees at times write articles or letters for newspapers openly critical of their employers. Should it make any difference in this case that Fuller himself was an editorial employee of a newspaper?
- Although Fuller wrote and published the “offensive” article on his own time, was his conduct protected under Section 7 of LMRA?
- Do you believe Fuller’s discharge for rules violations was a pretext for terminating him because of his pro-union activities?
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
Running head: UNLAWFUL LABOR PRACTICES
Unlawful Labor Practices
Name
Institutional Affiliation
1
UNLAWFUL LABOR PRACTICES
2
Unlawful Labor Practices
Introduction
Employees are entitled to form labor unions that facilitate their negotiation for better
wages and better working conditions. The National Labor Relations Board is in charge of
protecting employees from exploitation by their employer and gives them the right to speak up
about exploitative practices at work. However, the Act does not allow individuals to adopt
practices aimed at ruining the reputation of the organization or even specific individuals. Their
actions should be based on facts and supporting evidence. The actions outlined in the case study
o not represent unlawful fair practices as discussed below.
Question 1
The company’s rule 18 is against making false, vicious or malicious statements that
concern any employee, supervisor, the company or even its products. Rule 29 is about improper,
unlawful and...
Review
Review
