Reference no: EM13936967

Case Study:

Wal-Mart and the UFCW case study only 4% final grade in November 2003 Wal-Mart opened a new store in Weyburn, Saskatchewan. Soon after the store opened employees contacted the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) seeking union representation. In April of 2004 the union filed an application with the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board to represent the store's employees. The union application to represent employees is an application for certification and the details of this process are referred to in Chapter 6. The application for certification was the start of a legal battle that was ongoing in 2010. The union sought an order from the Board to require Wal-Mart to produce documents. It was alleged that Wal-Mart had provided managers with materialsthat showed Wai-Mart was guilty of illegal practices including "A Manager's Toolbox to Remain Union Free". The Board ordered Wal- Mart to produce documentation and WalMart appealed this decision. On the appeal a lower court judge quashed the subpoena and in his decision appeared to suggest that the Board was biased in favour of unions. Subsequently there were numerous comments on the situation in the media some of which were critical of the Labour Relations Board and the provisions of the Trade Union Act that allowed a union to be certified without an employee vote. There were calls for amendments to the legislation and changes at the Board. Some critics alleged that union contributions to the NDP party which was in power at the time made change unlikely. The Court of Appeal overturned the lower court decision and ordered Wai-Mart to produce the documentation. The Court of Appeal also indicated that the lower court's concerns regarding a possible bias in favour of unions by tl1e Labour Relations Board were unfounded. Wal Mart attempted to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, and this further delayed the certification application. While the Weyburn battle waged on, there w as a related development in Quebec. In February 2005, Wal-Mart announced that it would close a store in Jonquiere Quebec, which had been unionized for four months. Labour activists claimed mat this closing was intended to send a message to employees in Weyburn and elsewhere in North America about the negative consequences of seeking unionization. The president of the Saskatchewan
Federation of Labour referred to "economic terrorism" against Canadian workers. In April 2005, one full year after the original application for certification, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to grant Wal-Mart leave to appeal and tl1e certification process continued. Wal-Mart filed an application to block the Labour Relations Board from hearing the application alleging the Board was biased; however, a court decision rejected that application. Through tilis process, a Wal-Mart website stated that the company respects "the individual rights of our associates and encourage them to express their ideas, comments and concerns. Because we believe in maintaining an open environment of open communications, we do not believe mere is a need for third-party representation". Wal-Mart had some supporters in the ongoing battle with the union. O ne newspaper commentary provided as follows: "This province's unions are
aggressive by nature, helped along by labour laws that favour unions far more than business, some- thing that has been used by businesses as a clear illustration as to why companies avoid coming to Saskatchewan ... Presumabl)' the union has jobs for the approximately 3500 to 4000 employees who would be put out of work if Wal-Mart ... walked. Wal-Mart is a huge player in Saskatchewan. It provides hundreds of employees with jobs. It pays taxes. It is possibly the most popular retail outfit in the province. To lose something like that would be a major blow to the province's economy and employment levels not to mention the
government's open for business slogan it shops around the country."

In a 2007 provincial election, the NDP government was defeated by the Saskatchewan Party. In March of 2008 the new government ended the term of the chair of the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board who had been dealing with the UFCW certification application. In May of 2008 amendments to the Trade Union A ct that required a vote on certification applications came into effect. The chair of the Board continued to deal with the Weyburn application asserting that he had the authority to finish applications started before his term was ended on tile basis of the law as it was at the time of the application. In December of 2008 a certification order was granted. In 2009 Wal-Mart challenged the certification in court on the basis that the chair did not have jurisdiction and that the amendments to the Trade Union Act required a vote. In June of 2009 a lower court overturned the certification. Subsequently the union indicated that it would be appealing the decision. In July of 2009 Wai-Mart filed an application for a court injunction to restrict the activity of a union website critical of the company. UFCW Canada National President Wayne Hanley responded saying " This injunction rec1uest is an over the top assault on effective freedom of speech . . . It's a kneejerk response by Walmart to the idea of its employees trying to understand their options as workers, and trying to share experiences with other 'associates'. Walmart's response to the success of www.walmartworkerscanada.ca is just another outrageous example of how tile largest retailer in the history of the world will use its bottom less legal budget to manipulate tile collective bargaining process and do just about anything to discourage its 'associates' from joining the union."

Questions:

1. Identify the employer's labour relations strategy, and explain possible reasons for this strategy.

2. Outline the environmental factors referred to in Chapter 2 affecting this situation.