CASE STUDY The morning of 2019 April 16 started out as normal as any other for Donna Miller, sandwich maker at the Star Palace and Spa Hotel. This day would turn out anything but normal, though, as her services were terminated. Donna's only hope was successful intervention of her union. This 5-star hotel is noted for consistent friendly service by both management and staff. In addition to excellent service, Star Palace continually upgrades it amenities. It is therefore not unusual for construction/renovation workers to have a constant presence on the property. The hotel is also known for its great working relationship with workers, both permanent and temporary, and their union. Players in the industry look to Star Palace as the forerunner in settling wage and benefits contracts for workers, which are usually deemed fair to adequate. There are, however, strict policies and procedures with respect to benefits awarded to employees, one of which is that meals are provided for staff only. Third party personnel working on the property are therefore not entitled to meals. On the morning in question, Donna's supervisor, Sylvester Hill, saw her giving a sandwich to a third party (construction) worker. This was not the first time Donna was caught breaching this company policy. Mr Hill claimed that Miss Miller was warned previously, both verbally and in writing, and that she needed to take responsibility for her breach. The sandwich was retrieved as evidence and submitted to the Human Resource Department along with Donna's explanation that she was sharing her sandwich with the worker, Hill's report and the account of kitchen staff who had witnessed the incident. Donna was fired immediately. Co-workers demanded reinstatement as their opinion was that she was unfairly dismissed. Donna contacted her union representative and a meeting was held with management the following week with a bid to having her reinstated. The union argued that if Donna chose to give away her sandwich that should not be cause for dismissal. But management produced correspondence to support its claim that this was not the first time Donna was caught violating this policy and that she was warned of the consequences if her infraction were to happen again. Following the impasse, both parties agreed to refer this matter to the Ministry of Labour.

A. Was Donna's termination justified? State your reason(s). (3 marks)

B. Inform workers what is to be expected by TWO (2) methods of intervention that the Ministry of Labour can employ in this case. (12 marks)

C. Describe TWO (2) factors that must be present for conflict to exist. (5 marks)