UNION ORGANIZING AT FIRST CENTRAL BANK

This case analysis discusses the legal and ethical issues associated with the efforts of the International Metalworkers Union (the "Union") to organize the workforce at the First Central Bank (the "Bank") in River City in 1986 and in the ensuing representation election.

During the 1980s and subsequently union organizing efforts and elections to determine whether employees would be represented by unions have often taken place in an unusually rancorous and contentious atmosphere. The percentage of nonagricultural employees represented by unions steadily fell throughout the 70s and 80s, a trend which has continued since. In the total nonagricultural work force that percentage fell from 35 percent in 1954 to 20 percent in 1980 and only 10.4 percent by 1995. (Paul Weiler, "Promises to Keep: Securing Workers' Rights to Self-Organization under the NLRA," 96 Harv.L.Rev. 1771 (June 1983); and William A. Whiteside, Jr. and Marvin L. Weinberg, "Coping with the Unionization Drive: A Guide for the Careful Employer," Practical Lawyer 42 (Dec. 1997)). Competition between unions and employers for the allegiance of white collar workers in the private sector such as the staff at the Bank was especially fierce because the losses of membership suffered by the unions in downsized and relocated manufacturing industries and normal attrition was not offset by gains in union membership among white collar workers in the public sec

. . .
Inc. v. NLRB, 502 U.S. 527 (1992). The Q & A and small group meetings appear to have been held in employee work areas. However, Bank management must avoid holding such meetings in areas of management authority, such as the offices of supervisors, which have been held to be intimidating or coercive settings. Small group meetings can be held but no mass meetings can be held within 24 hours of elections by the employer under the 24 hour rule without risking jeopardizing the election results. Considerable latitude is allowed by NLRB to both sides during the organizing and election campaigns in their comments concerning the relative advantages and disadvantages of union membership to the employees on the theory that given the facts the employees can make a rational choice. The general rule announced in the case of NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575 (1969), is set forth at 575 and 618-619, namely, that an employer "may make a prediction as to the precise effects he believes unionization will have [but not] "threats of economic reprisal to be taken solely on his own volition." The answer to Questions 5 and 6 consist more or less of a prediction of the likelihood of strikes if the Bank becomes unionized and at least in the answ
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Practical Lawyer, Hogler Grenier, Union Bank, Gissel Bank's, American Workplace, Materials Law, Lumber NLRB, According Feldacker, Inc NLRB, Legal Rules, union organizing, unfair labor, labor practice, unfair labor practice, membership cards, collective bargaining, labor law, 2d ed, electoral process, labor management, disciplinary action, leadership bottom line, ethics leadership bottom, charles nelson robert, nelson robert cave,
Approximate Word count = 3780
Approximate Pages = 15 (250 words per page)

More Essays on UNION ORGANIZING AT FIRST CENTRAL BANK