What were the legal issues in this case? What did the court decide? Why was it c

Question

What were the legal issues in this case? What did the court decide? Why was it concluded that a valid impasse did not exist at the time that the employer ceased to negotiate? Since the employer wanted to eliminate the just cause provision in the contract and the union said that it would never agree to that, why wasn't that fact alone enough to show the existence of an impasse? So, what happens now? What if the parties still cannot come to agreement? What specific things should this employer have done differently to avoid the outcome in this case?

Explanation / Answer

Despite disagreement on 30 issues, Whitesell declared an impasse and unilaterally implemented its final offer. The appeals court agreed to enforce the NLRB's order requiring Whitesell to restore the previous collective bargaining agreement until a new agreement could be reached, according to the opinion. Whitesell failed to bargain in good faith when it set an arbitrary deadline for negotiations. The company also violated labor law when, after unilaterally implementing its final offer, forbade union members from using breaks and unpaid time to post notices on company property about union meetings The court also vacated and remanded an injunction against Whitesell in a separate opinion, ruling that the minimal requirements for the injunction were not met and that the district court that had issued it "presents the alleged unfair labor practices cryptically." The employer should have negotiate past the current agreement's expiration date with NLRB and should not have declared impasse unilaterally

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse W
• Subjects

---

---

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