Assignment 2: Case Study—The Case of the Misguided Supervisors
Read The Case of the Misguided Supervisors in Chapter 14 of your text book. Use the Argosy University online library for additional research, and do the following in a Word document:
- In 1–2 paragraphs, summarize the case and your research that relates to the case.
- In 2–3 pages, answer the following:
- Why would an organization care whether its supervisors speak in favor of or against union representation? Explain and justify your answer.
- How could the hospital in this example have prepared its supervisors to understand their proper role during an organizing campaign? Explain and justify your answer.
With your answers demonstrate that your understanding of the concepts is thorough and complete. Support your assertions with evidence, citing the appropriate sources.
Apply the APA current guidelines to your work and use at least three resources in your response.
Use the following file naming convention:
LastnameFirstInitial_M4_A2. For example, if your name is John Smith, your document will be named SmithJ_M4_A2.doc
By Wednesday, August 12, 2015, deliver your assignment to the M4: Assignment 2 Dropbox.
|Assignment 2 Grading Criteria||
|Clearly and concisely summarized the case in 1–2 paragraphs.||
|Identified, explained, and justified why an organization would care whether its supervisors speak in favor of or against union representation.||
|Identified, explained, and justified how the hospital in this example could have prepared its supervisors to understand their proper role during an organizing campaign.||
|Applied current APA guidelines and supported assertions with evidence by using appropriate sources. Demonstrated a thorough and complete understanding of the concepts.||
THIS IS THE ARTICLE ON WHICH THE ASSIGNMENT IS BASED:
The Case of the Misguided Supervisors
Recently, when a union sought to organize the nurses at a California hospital, the nursing supervisors, called charge nurses, didn’t understand their proper role in the process. While the union was distributing cards for the nurses to indicate their desire for a representation election, several of the charge nurses participated in the union’s meetings and decided they wanted to join. Some of these charge nurses also encouraged nurses who reported to them to support the union as well.
One month before the election, the hospital discovered that charge nurses had supported the union even though their positions in the organization qualified them as supervisors. The charge nurses stopped advocating for the union, and some even encouraged nonsupervisory nurses to vote against representation. The election went ahead, and the union won representation.
The hospital challenged the election because of the pro-union activity by the nurses. However, the NLRB and the court both upheld the union.
SOURCES: National Labor Relations Boards, “The NLRB Process,” http://www.nlrb.gov, accessed May 3, 2012; National Labor Relations Board, “NLRB Representation Case Amendments Take Effect Today,” news release, April 30, 2012, http://www.nlrb.gov; Duane Morris LLP, “Two NLRB Rules Effective April 30 Affect Most Private-Sector Employers,” Mondaq Business Briefing, April 20, 2012, http://galenet.galegroup.com.