Background of the Study
A union shop steward was on her regularly scheduled day off at home. She was called by her supervisor and told to talk to three union members and instruct them to attend a meeting called a "Quest for Quality Interaction Committee". The union had objected to the implementation of the Quest for Quality program. Since the employees were not paid extra for serving on these teams, the union told employees they could attend the meeting if their jobs were threatened, but they should do so under protest and then file a grievance afterward.
On the day in question, in a three-way conversation with the three employees, the union shop steward told them that she would not order them to attend the Quest for Quality meeting, although she had been asked by her supervisor to instruct them to go to the meeting. Since the supervisor who called the union shop steward wanted to avoid a confrontation with the employees, she did not order the employees to attend the meeting but relied on the union shop steward to issue the order. When union shop steward failed to order the employees to attend the meeting, she was suspended for two weeks. The union shop steward immediately filed a union grievance against the food service director asserting that the two-week suspension was inappropriate and unjust.
Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study is to give a specific solution to the main problem about the labor relations of a union shop steward’s insubordination to the supervisor which caused for her suspension.
Alternative Courses of Action
The management did the right decision of suspending the union shop steward because of the failure to follow the job assignment which is to direct employees to attend the meeting. Although the union shop steward is on her day off, she is still responsible to inform those employees because she is on the position that mediates the two parties. Since the only concern of the management is to have consent from...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document