IRAC Format Analysis
During the early 1900’s the labor law had become more significant to society in that it had begun to transcend America. Labor laws were ultimately important because of the ways in which employees, primarily African Americans, had earned the right to have better opportunities and greater knowledge of the monies generating through the company. At this time, such labor laws stirred quite the critics while it also provided clarity for the employees whom of which were clueless to the business models . The conceptual unions served as advantage and added strength behind the employees while it provoked the angst of most organizational executives. Workers employed within the warehouse of Dunder-Mifflin were considering forming a union. Jan Levinson, an executive of the Dunder-Mifflin, a member of management, informed the employees, considering forming a union, that they should take into consideration what transpired at another Dunder-Mifflin branch that formed a union. That branch closed implying that all of the employees lost their jobs.
Issue: In regards to the scenario, what procedures must the employees follow to form a union? Did Jan, as a member of management, commit an unfair labor practice by threatening the employees should they form a union? Procedurally, employees must proceed to conjoin and utilize the best of practices to form the union for the betterment. Seemingly, Jan, committed an unlawful act because according the code 8(a) employer must not inhibit the employee rights for organizing, form, conjoin, or succor a labor group or that particular employer would have violated the labor rights. Thus, Jan, the exec representing Dunder-Miffin is violating the employees and unlawful. Regardless of the previous situation that occurred at the other Dunder-Miffin branch, the procedures in which these employees should follow to form their union should be utterly respectable, as they should follow the Article 29, within the labor statistics code. Such will enable the workers to have a greater access to fair wages and all other unspoken benefits. This will also provide a key to change.
Rule: In the case of the Dunder-Miffin employees, deciding to form an employee union means is viable and lawful in that they are well within the provision. Jan who represents the the employer Dunder-Muffin, would be guilty of hindering the employees from bargaining collectively, engaging within additional concerted activities for the sake of joint aid or protection, while further obstructing the employees from utilizing their rights not to partaking in any of such doings, the employer has then desecrated the labor laws. Similarly, if Jan and the employer portend to dismiss the rights of employees such as their job and aids – contingent upon an individual conjoining the union, an employer is within violation of the National Labor Rights Association .
Analysis: Although Darrel reserve the right to file a complaint with National Labor Rights Association, he should really consider the worthiness of the possible case. While we may conclude that Jan is the culprit in this scenario, he considers the company to be at risk when employees decide to collective bargain, thus he is willing to threaten a branch collapse for the sake of rerouting the employee’s plan. Conclusively, Jan is guilty while the employees have made a lawful attempt to exercise their rights of forming the union.
Works Cited
Martin, Thomas R. Bruce and Peter W. Cornell University Law School: Legal Information Institute. Ney York, 1 January 1992-2014.
