1 Why does the court criticize MPS for recognizing the
1. Why does the court criticize MPS for recognizing the out-of-state union as the exclusive bargaining representative of the workers?
2. Suppose that MPS did recognize the local union and, subsequently, MPS and the local union negotiations reached an impasse over wages. Does MPS have any legal obligation to rehire the striking workers? Explain.

Under a contract, MPS provided unionized cement and transport truck drivers to River City, a construction materials company, for a project at a union job site. As a result, MPS required their drivers to join an out-of-state union however the drivers became dissatisfied with the out-of-state union and formed a local union. When MPS refused to recognized the local union on the basis that the agreement with the out-of-state union remained in effect, the drivers went on strike and MPS subsequently refused the employees’ unconditional offer to return to work and hired replacement workers. The NLRB concluded that employee’s strike of MPS was based on MPS’s unfair labor practices, rather than an economic dispute, and ordered the drivers reinstated with back pay, MPS appealed.

Membership TRY NOW
  • Access to 800,000+ Textbook Solutions
  • Ask any question from 24/7 available
  • Live Video Consultation with Tutors
  • 50,000+ Answers by Tutors
Relevant Tutors available to help