are150-3review-questions-3-answers

are150-3review-questions-3-answers - University of...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
University of California, Davis Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics ARE 150 Fall 2010 Philip Martin Dist 10/14/10 martin@primal.ucdavis.edu Due 10/26/10 Review Questions 3-- Midterm 1 is Thursday, October 28 Optional video on 1153 ULP—Tuesday November 2 (10 points) Please type or write neatly, and put your discussion section, 4-5 or 5-6, on your answers. Each answer is worth one point. 1. A. The four major categories or types of improper pre-election conduct that can cause an election to be set aside (meaning that the results are not certified by the ALRB) are TIPS ( T hreats, I nterrogations, P romises, S urveillance) committed by employers or unions that prevent workers from freely choosing a bargaining representative. Threats are employer or union actions and words to suggest retaliation if workers vote a certain way. Employers may threaten to mechanize or change crops and eliminate jobs if workers vote for the union (Hansen Farms 2 ALRB No. 61 (1976), while unions can threaten to call the INS to check on the status of workers if they vote for no union (T. Ito & Sons Farms, 11 ALRB No. 36 (1985). Interrogations are employer-led conversations aimed at determining if employees favor the union. Arnaudo Brothers Inc. 3 ALRB 78 (1977). Promises are employer or union commitments to take a certain action if the workers vote a certain way. For example, employers can promise to raise wages if the employees vote for no union, Hansen Farms 2 ALRB No. 61 (1976). In Sakata Ranches, 5 ALRB 56 (1979), the ALRB decided that the UFW did not unfairly promise the workers they could opt out of CPD contributions if they wanted to, since the UFW later corrected its statement and informed workers that CPD contributions were compulsory to be in good standing. Surveillance involves employers or employer agents watching and listening as employees talk to union organizers in a manner that may change their behavior. Arnaudo was surveilling employees when he said he knew one was at a union convention. In E. & J. Gallo Winery 7 ALRB 10 (1981), there was unlawful surveillance when Gallo guards and supervisors took pictures of farm workers who talked to UFW organizers, but not to workers who talked to Teamster organizers B. The NLRB uses a "laboratory condition" standard to judge whether the behavior objected to affected the outcome of the election—laboratories suggest that redoing a test yields the same result, so anything that violates “laboratory standards” could lead to the election/experiment being redone. The ALRB has a higher bar before it will redo an election. The objecting party must show that the behavior complained about affected the outcome of the election, and this "outcome determinative test” puts the burden of proof on the objecting party.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
The ALRB makes it harder to re-run elections because it does not want elections delayed until the 50-50 rule is satisfied again. 2. A. Before an election, a union can promise a wage increase but an employer
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/24/2011 for the course ARE 150 taught by Professor Martin during the Spring '08 term at UC Davis.

Page1 / 15

are150-3review-questions-3-answers - University of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online