Labor Law Discussion Case 1: Let's Do Lunch- Insubordination or Protected Activity?

Submitted by: Submitted by

Views: 34

Words: 568

Pages: 3

Category: Business and Industry

Date Submitted: 03/25/2015 06:41 AM

Report This Essay

Labor Law Discussion Case 1: Let's Do Lunch- Insubordination or Protected Activity?

1. The six employees are covered by NLRA Act. Specifically the definition of the NLRA Act explains that: " The term "employee" shall include any employee, ..., and shall include any individual whose work has ceased as a consequence of, or in connection with, any current labor dispute or because of any unfair labor practice...(494)". Even if they are not represented by an union they have the rights under the NLRA to engage in a "concerted activity", which is when two or more employees take action for their protection with respect of terms and employment conditions. It doesn't matter that they are not represented by a labor union under the NLRA, because each employee has the right under section 7 to do so.

2. The Bird Engineering violated Section 8 (a)(1)by firing the five employees for the activities that are protected in section 7.Though in our case the employees did not go on strike to have a protective activity, so the Bird Engineering has advantages against those employees. Even if the six employees would want to sue them, the company will respond with the employment at will. The six employees actions was insubordination, which is not a protected activity, and is not in the employee's favor. From the employer stand point they see that they did not violated the law, because the employees did not go beyond the disagreement, like to become represented by an union and go on a strike. Although under the NLRA Excerpt under section 7 and 8 the employees have the rights of to form, join, or assist labor organizations and it shall be a unfair labor practice for an employer. From the article we can say that they did not inform well their employees about the new rule, because Christina Hodgeman when she was hired a month ago, she had been told that: " employees were permitted to go to the parking lot but should clock out"(145), which she followed up the rule. It is seems that the...