CAPSTONE ASSIGNMENT
| Learning Outcomes Upon successful completion of this subject the student will be able to: Discuss the nature of collective agreements and their role in regulating the workplace environment.Describe the process of preparing for and negotiating a collective agreement.Recognize the issues and problems that most frequently arise concerning administration of the collective agreement.Discuss the grievance arbitration process. |
| Course Learning Outcomes Covered in Assignment |
| Submission Submit your project in a Word or PDF in the Blackboard Assignment section. This will provide your Facilitator with access to your assignment for evaluation. |
| Assignment Purpose: The purpose of this assignment is to assess the Learning Outcomes noted above. A note on credible sources: Credible sources are those whose reputation is widely respected and verifiable, such Labour Relations by Larry Suffield This is a sample list |
| Academic Integrity As a scholar you are expected to exhibit academic integrity throughout this course. Academic Integrity is demonstrated by your behaviour and the work you produce. The work you produce must be your own and be free from plagiarized content ‐ failure to do so could result in serious consequences. Please refer to the academic integrity/honesty policy of your registering college for more information. To learn more about Academic Integrity and your responsibilities, including how to cite, please visit The Learning Portal ‐ Research Hub. |
Assignment Rubric
| 80‐100% A to A+ | 70‐79% B | 60‐69% C | 50 =‐ 59% D | |
| Understanding of the Basic Concepts and Learning Outcomes 50% of the mark | demonstrates a superior understanding of all of the basic conceptsprovides clear and complete explanations in an exceptional manneraddresses the major issues and outcomes in a superior manner | demonstrates a professional understanding of all the basic conceptsprovides complete or nearly complete explanations for conclusions and proposalsaddresses the major issues and outcomes in a superior manner | demonstrates a basic understanding of the basic conceptsexplanations are not always complete or clearaddresses the major issues and outcomes in a generally acceptable manner | demonstrates that they have do not have a clear understanding of some of the basic conceptsexplanations show a limited understanding of some key conceptsproposals or explanations are either unclear or incomplete |
| Communication of Required Knowledge 15% of the mark | communicates with superior clarity, and precisionalways uses the appropriate terminologyaddresses all of the key issuesno grammatical errorsall citations made in the required manner | communicates with a professional level of clarity and precisionusually uses appropriate terminologyaddresses most of the key issuesminor or a minimum of grammatical errorsall citations made | communicates with some claritygenerally, uses appropriate terminologyaddresses some of the key issuesgrammatical errors are noticeablesome phrases, ideas, or statistics not adequately cited | the writing style is below accepted standards marring the ability to clearly communicate the ideas and conceptsnumerous grammatical errorslack of citations creates concerns regarding academic integrity |
| Organization of Ideas 25% of the mark | presents superior conclusions, proposals or addresses outcomes in a logical mannerdemonstrates logic in their reasoningideas are organized logically and clearly | ideas are organized appropriately and logicallyconclusions are clear and appropriate | conclusions or proposals contain a flaw in logic or understandingconclusions are lacking in cohesion | conclusions or proposals do not demonstrate a clear understanding or command of the required outcomesreads like much of the content was ‘cut and pasted’ from the work of others |
| Format and editing 10% of the mark | submission is of required lengtha thorough and complete Bibliography is includedall references, appropriately cited in footnotes | submission is of required lengtha thorough and complete Bibliography is includedreferences all cited | submission is roughly of required lengtha complete Bibliography is includedmost references are listed and cited | submission is not of the required length the Bibliography is incompletemany references are not cited or omitted |
PART 1 – STRIKE ‐ LOCKOUT ‐ (Total: 20 marks)
Most jurisdictions in Canada have similar or same requirements for a strike or lockout. Question 1 (10 marks)
Outline/List the requirements for a strike or lockout. Describe/note any timelines and/or details of each of the points for further explanation.
Question 2 (10 marks) – Case study Wilson Brothers
The collective agreement for the UFCW union at the Toronto Plant with 800 employees has expired and the parties have begun negotiations. Wilson Brothers and the UFCW had successfully negotiated 2 other Collective agreements of 2 years each. This will be the 3rd, however, this time around, negotiations are not going so well. The union is looking for better wages, job security and a voice in the Company.
Bargaining Power influences the outcome of collective negotiations.
Question 2: Outline what are the factors that will affect an Employers’ bargaining power during negotiations and describe each as related to the Wilson Brothers specific case?
PART 2‐NEGOTIATIONS PREPARATION‐(Total: 20 marks)
Charles Perkins has recently been hired to assist VPHR Dan McGraw in the next negotiations between Wilson Bros Toronto and the UFCW. Dan and Charles met last week and Dan has asked Charles to draft a Company Mandate Document for this upcoming set of negotiations. Charles initially was puzzled at the request because he hasn’t had to prepare a document like this in any of his past positions and he has no idea why it is a necessary and valuable part of the negotiations planning process. He will soon learn though!!!
Question 1 (8 marks)‐ Describe each element of a Company Mandate Document and comment on its value, in general, to the negotiations process.
Question 2 (8 marks)‐ From your knowledge of the Wilson Bros Case Scenario, apply each element of the Company Mandate Document directly to Wilson’s upcoming negotiation. Explain why your version of the Document should be fully supported by John and Bob Wilson?
Question 3 (4 marks)‐ Which elements of a Company Mandate Document would the union also use in their negotiations planning process? Why?
PART 3‐GRIEVANCE/ARBITRATION ‐2 CASE SCENARIOS‐20 Marks Each‐Total: (40 Marks)
Case Study Analysis
Read the following case studies carefully. Indicate for all responses the rationale for your decisions/recommendations and any assumptions you are making. As with most case studies, you do not have all the information you require.
Case Scenario 1 Grievance/Arbitration Genevieve Rioux Case (20 marks)
Genevieve Rioux came to Ontario from Quebec twelve years ago as a widowed mother of two children. She didn’t have much formal education but she was willing to work to support her family and secured a job as a cook’s assistant at the Novotel Hotel downtown. She had been in that position for 6 years at the time of the incident which occurred on March 10th, 2020. On that day she was seen by her supervisor, Carol Logan, removing some food product from the kitchen freezer, putting it inside her jacket and then attempting to leave the premises as her shift had ended. Carol confronted Genevieve at the time, at which point Genevieve denied that she had taken anything from the kitchen. Carol indicated to Genevieve that she was suspended without pay at that point subject to further discipline based on an investigation. The investigation showed that Ms. Rioux had at least three other disciplinary letters on her file for various offences in the past two years, the most recent for insubordination.
Two days later, the investigation complete, the hotel advised Genevieve in writing that her services were terminated for just cause because of theft of company product which directly contravenes a clause in the current collective agreement. Genevieve contacted her union and the union filed a grievance disputing the termination for cause. The case went to arbitration and was heard by a single arbitrator in August 2020.
Question 1 (5 marks)‐
The Company’s position is to have the Arbitrator uphold the termination.
What did the company argue to support?
Question 2 (5 marks)‐
The Union’s position is to have the termination squashed and Eva reinstated.
What did the union argue to support?
Question 3 (10 marks)‐
What did the single arbitrator decide and what criteria was used to make the decision?
Case Scenario 2 Goodtime Food Products Ltd. (20 Marks)
Goodtime Food Products Ltd. produces processed foods including pickles, relish and canned vegetables. The production workers are covered by a collective agreement. Six months ago, the company discharged Rano, one of the employees in the bargaining unit, after an incident in the plant. She had worked for the company for seven years without incident prior to the date of her dismissal.
Rano worked at a packing station monitoring a machine that filled pickle bottles with small cucumbers. Occasionally, when there was not enough work, Rano had been moved to another job inspecting bottles.
On the day of the incident, Ed Thomas, her supervisor, decided that another employee should be trained on Rano’s regular job so that there would be a replacement available if Rano were absent. Because Rano spoke very little English, Thomas instructed another employee, Lucy Battaglia, who spoke the same language as Rano, to tell her to report to the inspection area when she reported to work.
When Rano arrived for work and Battaglia told her she was being taken off her regular job, she became outraged and swore about Thomas. She then walked a short distance to another workstation where Thomas was speaking to another employee and swore and gestured at Thomas with a pair of scissors that were at the workstation. A few minutes later, Rano spoke to the shop steward. The shop steward immediately prepared a grievance.
When Rano and the shop steward presented the grievance to Thomas in his office, he crumpled it up and threw it in the waste basket. Thomas told Rano to get back to work. Fifteen minutes later, Thomas went to the inspection area where Rano was working. Rano became outraged. She swore at Thomas, picked up a knife that was on a workbench, shouted and made slashing gestures about three feet from Thomas’ lower body. Thomas left the area.
The company discharged Rano later that day. The union filed a grievance challenging the dismissal. The matter has gone through the grievance process and is now before an Arbitrator.
Arbitrator’s Decision
After hearing the Employer and Union arguments, the Arbitrator in this case ordered the grievor to be re‐instated to her job and that the appropriate penalty would be a suspension without pay.
Question 1 – (15 marks)
There are many factors that Arbitrators consider when reviewing discipline imposed by an Employer.
Outline the mitigating factors for this case that led the Arbitrator to that decision to reinstate Rano and substitute the termination with a suspension without pay?
Question 2 – (5 marks)
2 (a) What do you recommend to be the length of the suspension? And why?
2 (b) Other than reinstatement, what other conditions could the Arbitrator decide and impose?
PART 4‐ UNION VS NON‐UNION WORKPLACE PRACTICES (20 Marks)
Robert Dickens was recently hired as the General Manager of the Wilson Brothers production and distribution facility in Toronto. Dickens is an American with no prior experience in Canada or knowledge of Ontario’s labour laws. Dickens has also never before worked in a unionized environment.
The production and distribution workers in this facility are unionized. They recently negotiated and certified their 3rd collective agreement. They were unionized after workers became upset over what they believed was unfair treatment by a Plant Manager who favoured some workers and dismissed others ‘on a whim’.
After attempting early in his time at Wilson Brothers to dismiss an employee, Dickens was shocked to find that the employee could grieve his dismissal.
Dickens is discovering that his previous management tactics do not seem acceptable in his new workplace.
Therefore, he contacts his facility Human Resources Manager, Sean McDonald and asks that Sean explain to him the primary differences between the practices in union versus non‐union workplaces.
Question: Describe examples that Sean would provide to Robert. These should include the following:
a) Dismissals/Terminations (4 marks)
- Promotions/Job Postings (4 marks)
c) Overtime Distribution (4 marks)
- Salary Negotiations (4 marks)
