The text discusses propaganda and misrepresentation in elections to determine wh

Question

The text discusses propaganda and misrepresentation in elections to determine whether or not workers will have union representation. As you can see, the NLRB decided on the position espoused in Hollywood Ceramics. The NLRB reversed the Hollywood decision in Shopping Kart Food Markets, Inc. Sometime later it reversed itself and went back to Hollywood. It then reversed itself and went back to Shopping Kart again!

Why do you think the NLRB has been so schizophrenic in this area and which position do you think is correct in deciding when the NLRB should intervene in a representative election issue? Why?

Explanation / Answer

In NRLB`s deduction it is clearly depicted that policy prevailed over practically. In Hollywood ceramic rule the main difficulty was in predicting whether the board would find a particular misrepresentation material under all the circumstances. The rule was very flexible and needed detailed factual determinations resulting inconsistent result and thus opting for shopping kar. The shopping kart decision preserved free choice as the standard for regulatin campaign conduct in area other than misrepresentation, which as a result pointed out the inconsistency of ignoring misinterpretation while regulating ether behavior. While returning to Hollywood ceramic rule, the board discarded empirical evidence in favour of reliance on its own expertise.

Regardless of the benefit of shopping cart approach, Hollywood Ceramics rule's longevity and quick recovery means continuing vitality in the future. Even at the expense of practical consideration. So the NRLB's decision was right as free choice in meaningless unless the result of that choice can't be implemented quickly.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.