1. Do you think the court made the right decision in this case? Explain.

2. Given that there is a statutory duty to bargain in good faith, why do you think management chose to do what it did?

3. Given how strict the final order to bargain was on management, does management’s strategy make sense to you?

Issue: Whether management can be ordered by NLRB to engage in specific activity to bargain in good faith.

Facts: In 1995 the union won a representation election and was duly certified by NLRB as the bargaining representative for equipment operators, oilers/drivers, and equipment mechanics for Miami-Dade and Monroe counties. Management refused to meet with the union and provide the requested information to the union since 1999. NLRB issued an order for management to bargain, finding it’s refusal to do so a violation of Section 8 (a) 5. The 11^th Circuit enforced the Board’s order and management continued to refuse to meet and bargain or to provide the requested information to the union despite numerous requests. For years management failed to comply with the Board’s order to bargain, institute a bargaining schedule or submit progress reports to gauge whether the Board’s court-enforced order was being complied with. The Court eventually ordered that management meet with the union within 21 days of the decision, meet and bargain for a minimum of 16 hours per week until an agreement is reached, or a hiatus or lawful impasse declared, and prepare a written bargaining progress report every 30 days.

Decision: Yes, where a party has for years refused Board and court orders to bargain, specific provisions for bargaining can be imposed upon them by the Board and courts.