First the leader could try and argue that the discharge of Drake and Keeler was an acceptable exercise of management's rights because of at will employment. The management will dismiss by leader for any reason without having to ascertain simply cause for termination and abruptly. If Drake and Keeler are acknowledged as workers at will, the workers are denied any claim for loss ensuing from dismissal. Since there's no mention of a union contract or employment contract that guarantees employment to the worker for a amount of your time, the leader has the power to lay-off a worker at will. This can be one defense that the employers of Drake and Keeler could use. The legal exercise of the management's right to lay-off is one cause.
Also the management could claim that it had simply cause for dismissing Drake and Keeler. An leader who terminates a worker for simply cause should argue that the leader who terminates a worker should be able to prove the employee's conduct or behavior was so serious in its nature. One of the most common samples of simply cause is willful misconduct. If the leader of Drake and Keeler incorporates a uniformed enforced rule or policy that an individual leaving work without the permission of …show more content…
The leader could argue that there was no concerted activity for collective bargaining as a result of bargaining never came about and therefore the two workers in their personal capability merely walked out of the workplace. This is often an argument which will establish that provisions of Section 8 don't apply during this case. “Employers who discipline or discharge employees for participating in protected “concerted activities” violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or Act)” which the two employee in this case feel that they did not break any
Also the management could claim that it had simply cause for dismissing Drake and Keeler. An leader who terminates a worker for simply cause should argue that the leader who terminates a worker should be able to prove the employee's conduct or behavior was so serious in its nature. One of the most common samples of simply cause is willful misconduct. If the leader of Drake and Keeler incorporates a uniformed enforced rule or policy that an individual leaving work without the permission of …show more content…
The leader could argue that there was no concerted activity for collective bargaining as a result of bargaining never came about and therefore the two workers in their personal capability merely walked out of the workplace. This is often an argument which will establish that provisions of Section 8 don't apply during this case. “Employers who discipline or discharge employees for participating in protected “concerted activities” violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or Act)” which the two employee in this case feel that they did not break any