1 / 4

Notice Time Frame

Notice Time Frame. 1993 – Board decision on UFLP charges from 1986-88 (Beverly I) 1994 – ALJ decision on UFLP charges from 1991 complaint (Beverly II) 1995 – ALJ decision on UFLP charges from 1993 complaint (Beverly III) 2000 – court decision 2001 (July 23) –Board Order, 334 N.L.R.B. No. 79.

enan
Download Presentation

Notice Time Frame

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Notice Time Frame • 1993 – Board decision on UFLP charges from 1986-88 (Beverly I) • 1994 – ALJ decision on UFLP charges from 1991 complaint (Beverly II) • 1995 – ALJ decision on UFLP charges from 1993 complaint (Beverly III) • 2000 – court decision • 2001 (July 23) –Board Order, 334 N.L.R.B. No. 79

  2. One Integrated Employer • Centralized Structure • Beverly's hierarchical management structure • Policy of limiting the authority of area and individual facility managers by overall corporate standards • central oversight of labor relations functions • labor grievances bump up to the regional level at step three • Beverly dispatches regional human resources personnel to individual facilities the minute a union organizational effort begins.

  3. Authority of Board • Board may use corporate-wide relief • when evidence suggests unfair labor practices at numerous facilities • centralized management structure

  4. Factors Supporting Corporate-Wide Remedy • Number of facilities involved • 20 mentioned in case • 54 overall (of 895) • Percentage of facilities • 6% of all facilities • 15% of unionized facilities • Deep involvement of area (regional) managers at the facility • Recidivism (repeated violations)

More Related