(1) The workers at a “big box” department store have been discontented for some time, Issues include denying any overtime despite fairly low salaries, not enough employees so that workers seldom get breaks, and abusive supervisors in some departments. Seven of the workers get together after work to discuss the idea of contacting the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union, to explore unionization.

The next day in the afternoon, a corporate jet from company headquarters elsewhere in the country flies into the local airport. Local management for the store is relieved of its duty and the individuals from the headquarters take over. All workers are forced (on company time) to view anti-union videos depicting union supporters as thugs and Communists; union staff persons are depicted as vultures just trying to take the workers’ money in dues.

The seven workers, as well as about 25 others who work near them, are called into the manager’s office and asked if they have anything in particular on their minds about working at the store. They are told in no uncertain terms that this company does not tolerate unions. A couple of them are told that they have potential for advancement in the company to managerial ranks, coupled with the observation that “Of course, when a company has a union, it’s not allowed to notice the hard work of the best employees and reward them accordingly.” One of the seven, who has had a spotty attendance record, is told that if he is tardy for work one more time, he will be dismissed.
Do you see any possible grounds for ULP charges here? What might they be? I have not given much detail about the particular workers, or about what else the new “managers” may have said. What additional facts about either would make you say “yes” or “no” in answer to the question?

(2) John has just become the leader or “ringleader” in a union organizing drive at a medium sized janitorial firm. In the past, John has been at best a mediocre worker – in the past 3 years he has been written up four times for inadequate performance. Two weeks after the organizing drive becomes public with John playing a prominent vocal role, the company tells him he is being let go, because the company is now upgrading the quality of its service, and as the manager puts it, “Halfway workers just aren’t good enough for us anymore. We’re now going to have only top notch workers who provide the best janitorial services in the city.”
Discuss the “dual motives” issue in Section 8(a)(3) discrimination ULPs, and whether you think John and the union have a chance at sustaining a ULP charge over his dismissal. Be sure to explain why you take the position you do: what is your reasoning?

(3) A bitter union organizing drive has been going on at the XYZ production company for a few months. The company is fighting the union tooth-and-nail. One of the workers (who would be represented by the union if it was successful) has been vocally and sarcastically opposing the union effort, calling his fellow workers who support the union a bunch of “little sissy pantywaists” who have to “hide behind the skirt of a union boss” rather than take responsibility for their own work lives.
One night this worker’s home gets two windows broken by thrown rocks. A message attached to one of the rocks has written on it, “Scab! SOB shithead!” The next day at work this worker charges straight at the person leading the union organizing drive (who he thinks is behind it despite having no real evidence that this is so) and punches him in the mouth, accusing him of being responsible. The company takes no disciplinary action against him, telling him to calm down and get back to work.
Please answer question ONE by ONE and use as reference Understandign Labor Law