While frequently unionized in their home countries, foreign multinationals often try to remain union-free when opening factories in the U.S. The auto industry is a good example. There are more than 30 automobile manufacturing plants in the U.S. that are foreign-owned, but none are unionized. These factories are typically located in parts of the U.S. where labor unions are weaker. The factories are often subsidized by state and local governments. In 2008, a Honda plant opened in Greensburg, Indiana. It received $140 in tax breaks and other subsidies. When hiring, Honda only considered job applicants from the 20 counties within an hour drive of the factory. Applicants from the other 72 Indiana counties were not considered for positions, even if they were willing to relocate. There were thousands of people in Indiana who were laid-off from the unionized General Motors plant, but they were prohibited from applying to the jobs at Honda because they lived outside the hiring zone designated by Honda. 1. Why do foreign auto companies focus on becoming union-free in the U.S.? 2. Why do you think Honda implemented its restrictive hiring policy? Is it an antiunion tactic? Is it discriminatory? 3. Should Honda's restrictive hiring policy be illegal? Is it ethical? 4. Do you believe being a union-free facility helps or hurts the upper management in this company? 5. Look at the Indiana Honda facility website. Are there still hiring specifications that require the employee to live in a certain area? Is the facility still union-free? Does this look like a good place to work as an general employee or in the management team? While frequently unionized in their home countries, foreign multinationals often try to remain union-free when opening factories in the U.S. The auto industry is a good example. There are more than 30 automobile manufacturing plants in the U.S. that are foreign-owned, but none are unionized. These factories are typically located in parts of the U.S. where labor unions are weaker. The factories are often subsidized by state and local governments. In 2008, a Honda plant opened in Greensburg, Indiana. It received $140 in tax breaks and other subsidies. When hiring, Honda only considered job applicants from the 20 counties within an hour drive of the factory. Applicants from the other 72 Indiana counties were not considered for positions, even if they were willing to relocate. There were thousands of people in Indiana who were laid-off from the unionized General Motors plant, but they were prohibited from applying to the jobs at Honda because they lived outside the hiring zone designated by Honda. 1. Why do foreign auto companies focus on becoming union-free in the U.S.? 2. Why do you think Honda implemented its restrictive hiring policy? Is it an antiunion tactic? Is it discriminatory? 3. Should Honda's restrictive hiring policy be illegal? Is it ethical? 4. Do you believe being a union-free facility helps or hurts the upper management in this company? 5. Look at the Indiana Honda facility website. Are there still hiring specifications that require the employee to live in a certain area? Is the facility still union-free? Does this look like a good place to work as an general employee or in the management team?