Salting

Read Case Study 4-1, “Salting,” on pages. Then, address the following:

1. Explain how the company’s treatment of both the “covert” and “overt” salts applications for jobs compares to the recommended counter-salting steps for employers.
2. Would either the “covert” or the “overt” salts in this case satisfy the NLRB ruling that applicants for employment must be genuinely interested in seeking employment before claiming protection under the NLRA?
3. Does the company’s opposition to becoming a union shop indicate that there was anti-union animus in refusing to consider the “overt” salts for employment?

Your response should be a minimum of 150 words per question. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations in APA format.

KEY TAKEAWAYS BEFORE ATTEMPTING THIS ASSIGNMENT

Read Case Study 4-1, “Salting,” on pages. Then, address the following: Explain how the company’s treatment of both the “covert” and “overt” salts applications for jobs compares to the recommended counter-salting steps for employers. Would either the “covert” or the “overt” salts in this case satisfy the NLRB ruling that applicants for employment must be genuinely interested in seeking employment before claiming protection under the NLRA? Does the company’s opposition to becoming a union shop indicate that there was anti-union animus in refusing to consider the “overt” salts for employment?

Introduction

In this case study, we will examine how direct-hire staffing agencies Salts, Inc. handled layoffs in its 2017 fiscal year. The company made an application with the NLRB to be recognized as an employer-friendly union shop. In May 2017, Salts received a ruling from an administrative law judge (ALJ) that found that no evidence showed that Salts had engaged in anti-union animus when it refused to consider applicants for employment who had previously been salted by another company. As such, the ALJ ruled against granting Salts union recognition under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Introduction

In this case study, we’ll explore an employer’s decision to adopt a policy of counter-salting. The following questions are addressed:

• What is salting?
• How do you know if your company is practicing salting?
• What steps should be taken when dealing with applicants who claim rights under the NLRA but do not want to work for your company?

Case Study 4-1

• Explain how the company’s treatment of both the “covert” and “overt” salts applications for jobs compares to the recommended counter-salting steps for employers.
• Would either the “covert” or the “overt” salts in this case satisfy the NLRB ruling that applicants for employment must be genuinely interested in seeking employment before claiming protection under the NLRA?
• Does this case provide any insight into whether an employer should consider overt applications as part of its practice when considering whether it needs to engage in counter-salt activity?

Salting

You might be wondering how the company’s treatment of both the “covert” and “overt” salts applications for jobs compares to the recommended counter-salting steps for employers. Let’s take a closer look at these two types of applications.

Recommended Counter-Salts

You may feel that the company’s treatment of both the “covert” and “overt” salts applications for jobs compares to the recommended counter-salting steps for employers.

Some interviewees felt that this case is best viewed as a win for employees, because they were able to find new jobs quickly after being laid off. Other interviewees felt it was unfair because applicants who did not have sought-after skills could not get hired.

The layoffs in this case study were not caused by union activity, but they were unfair nonetheless.

The layoffs in this case study were not caused by union activity, but they were unfair nonetheless.

The company had a right to fire employees and was not required to treat them fairly or equally. It also did not need to treat them in a way that was consistent with the NLRA.

Conclusion

In this case, it is clear that the employer’s actions were not driven by anti-union animus, but rather, an attempt to maximize profits. However, we do not condone such behavior and encourage all employers to consider their fair share of employee wages.

WOULD YOU LIKE A CUSTOM ESSAY JUST FOR YOU?



Get Assignment Help- Confidentially!




Why Choose Ace Writing Center?

***Absolutely NO Plagiarism.

***All writing is original.

***Guaranteed Top Grade.

***24/7 Support

***100% Money Back Guarantee

***Free revision