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?

Read Case Study 4-1, “Salting,” (ATTACHED). 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 200 words per question. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations in APA format.

Reference:

Carrell, M. R. & Heavrin, C. (2013). Labor relations and collective bargaining: Private and public sectors (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

attachment
salting_p_11.png
attachment
salting_p_21.jpg
attachment
salting_p_31.jpg