You have a right to be represented by your union fairly, in good faith, and without discrimination. Your union has the duty to represent all employees - whether members of the union or not-fairly, in good faith, and without discrimination. This duty applies to virtually every action that a union may take in dealing
with an employer as your representative, including collective bargaining, handling grievances, and operating exclusive hiring halls. For example, a union which represents you cannot refuse to process a grievance because you have criticized union officials or because you are not a member of the union. But the duty does not ordinarily apply to rights a worker can enforce independently - such as filing a workers' compensation claim - or to internal union affairs - such as the union's right to
discipline members for violating its own rules. This is a preview. Log in through your library. Abstract The authors examine three phases in the unionization process among Imperial Oil Limited employees in Canada who, in 1993, decided to withdraw from a long-standing nonunion employee representation plan: the conditions leading to the propensity to unionize; the transformation into a bargaining unit; and post-certification behaviors and practices. The unionization process in this case study differed from that suggested by literature based on unionization among workers without a previous history of collective representation. In the pre-campaign phase, workers experienced a significant loss of perceived power due to changes in company practices and managerial style. Elected worker delegates to the nonunion representation plan spearheaded the union campaign. The union organizing phase allowed the company multiple opportunities for redress without unionization. Subsequent union attachment was diminished by continuing loyalty to aspects of the old system. Journal Information Issued quarterly since October 1947, the Industrial & Labor Relations Review is a leading interdisciplinary journal, broad in scope and international in its coverage of work and employment issues. We also publish reviews of some 20 books per year. We define industrial relations to include a broad range of market, organizational, and institutional processes related to the world of work. Relevant topics include the organization of work, the nature of employment contracts, human resource management, employment relations, conflict management and dispute resolution, labor market dynamics and policies, labor and employment law, and employee attitudes and behaviors at work. Our articles are edited with the aim of making their findings and conclusions intelligible to all readers. Publisher Information Sara Miller McCune founded SAGE Publishing in 1965 to support the dissemination of usable knowledge and educate a global community. SAGE is a leading international provider of innovative, high-quality content publishing more than 900 journals and over 800 new books each year, spanning a wide range of subject areas. A growing selection of library products includes archives, data, case studies and video. SAGE remains majority owned by our founder and after her lifetime will become owned by a charitable trust that secures the company’s continued independence. Principal offices are located in Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC and Melbourne. www.sagepublishing.com Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. This is a preview. Log in through your library. Abstract This study examines the factors which led to the continued legality of nonunion collective representation in Canada, in contrast to the American approach which banned formal nonunion plans. It is argued that the delay in the passage of Canadian labour laws allowed a constellation of pressures to emerge which supported the continued use of nonunion plans within both private and public sectors. Further, the influence of William Lyon Mackenzie King, and his prior support for a particular nonunion approach were influential in Canada. Canadian statutory mechanisms and subsequent labour board interpretations are presented. The practical result is that nonunion plans continue to persist outside of the statutory regimes governing union-management relations, and may form an important component of the industrial relations landscape. Este estudio examina los factores que llevaron a la continua legalización de la representación colectiva no sindical en Canadá, en contraste con el sistema americano que elimino los planes no sindicales. Es argumentado que el retraso de la implementacion de las leyes laborales en Canadá permitió una muy intensa presión que soportaba el movimiento de representación no sindical en ambos sectores (publico y privado). La influencia de William Lyon Mackenzie King, y su soporte por la representación no sindical fueron de gran influencia en Canadá. Los mecanismos y estatutos canadienses y las consecuentes interpretaciones laborales son presentadas. El resultado practico es que la representación no sindical sigue persistiendo fuera de los regímenes y los estatutos que gobiernan las relaciones entre la empresa y los sindicatos, y tal vez formen un componente del panorama de las relaciones industriales. Journal Information Relations Industrielles / Industrial Relations is a bilingual quarterly published since 1945 by the Department of Industrial Relations at Laval University in Québec, Canada. It was the world's first academic journal in industrial relations and is the only journal in the field in Canada. Publisher Information Départment des Relations Industrielles, Université Laval is one of the largest educational and research centers in the field of work in North America. Founded in 1943, the department provides a focus on the interactions that occur within different workplaces and during work curriculum. Its programs are designed to train professionals who will manage the relationships between the main actors of an organization such as employers, workers, and possibly the unions that represent them, taking into account the the political, legal, economic and social environment in which they operate. Which of the following is true about union members participation in the governance of their unions?Which of the following is true about union members' participation in the governance of their unions: Union members are more active at the local level than at the national level. A strategy of working toward remaining nonunion is known as: Union avoidance.
What is the difference between union and non union bodies?Unionized employees are unable to negotiate their employment terms individually. They need to approach a collective agreement. A non-unionized employee can negotiate on their own behalf. They can request raises or changes to their employment agreement without needing to worry about the collective agreement.
What is a nonNon-unionized employees have individual agreements with the employer (employment contracts) and can, therefore, have individualized terms of employment. In a non-unionized workplace, an employer can pay employees who do the same job different amounts, let them have different work schedules etc.
What is a non union member?Employees in a nonunion negotiate the terms of their employment through individual contracts. In a nonunion job, the employers hold most of the power, which means that they develop their own guidelines and work expectations, including hours, wages and work schedules.
|
Which of the following is true about a nonunion employee representation plan?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 decemle Inc.
