Employees of RELCO began to discuss forming a union, to which RELCO was adamantly opposed. There began a series of interactions which ultimate led to the firing of four employees, all of whom had been active in supporting the formation of a union. The NLRB found that substantial evidence supported the Board’s conclusions that RELCO unlawfully discharged workers for engaging in protected labor activity.

1. What were the legal issues in this case? What did the appeals court decide?

2. What is the Wright Line analysis? How did the court apply it to the terminations of Jeffrey Smith, Ronald Dixon, and Timothy Kraber?

3. Why did the termination of Dane See present a somewhat different legal issue? Why did the court conclude that his termination also violated the NLRA?

4. What is your impression of RELCO’s managers? Apart from the terminations, are there other things they did in reaction to the union organizing that were legally inadvisable? What things and why were they legally inadvisable? Apart from legal considerations, are there things you see the managers doing in this case that might have contributed to an antagonistic relationship between labor and management in this plant? What things?

5. The court in this case enforces an NLRB order to, among other things, reinstate these employees with back pay. Is that remedy sufficient, considering that it comes to three or four years after the terminations and with back pay reduced by interim earnings? Why or why not?