Employment and labour Law



Employment and labour Law

The Union would like to challenge the employer's practices before the certification vote

Legal arguments of the parties

If the Union would like to challenge the employer's practices before the certification vote that the legal arguments of the parties involves the certification package that has been send to the chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Company giving notice that the Union was going to apply for certification. It has been done on September 7, 2010. On September 9, 2010 the Union applied for a certification vote with the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB).

Legal merits of these arguments

The legal merits of the arguments are based upon the practices of the company particularly those possessed by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Company. It has been done to organize the workers of the company. The name of the company is India currents which deals in print media and publish newspaper in Ontario headquartered in Toronto, Canada. The company started the drive with the collaboration of the Southern Ontario Communications and News media Trade Union (the Union) in August 2010. The argument of the workers is legal in a sense that they have an aim to organize the workers of the company (Cranford & Ladd, 2010).

Potential remedies

The workers wanted to organize the management related to the work force of the company and for this reason they started the drive to have union in their company.

The decision to layoff and to contract out workers

Legal arguments of the parties

The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Company responded to the certification vote and the notice given to them by lying out and contracting out the workers of the organization. On September 10, the CEO issued a lengthy letter to all employees saying that a competitor newspaper in Ontario had a union but fewer employees. On September 12, 2010, ten employees were laid off which included the Union's bargaining committee Chair, Álvaro de Azevedo and Vice-Chair Clarice Costa. The CEO argued in a letter to all employees that the formation of the Union would increase costs and adversely impact the profits of the Company and further, the layoffs were based on decreasing sales and the resulting financial uncertainty. The services of most of the laid off employees were discontinued, but the service of some of them were contracted out to external sales representatives.

Legal merits of these arguments

The CEO argued in a letter to all employees that the formation of the Union would increase costs and adversely impact the profits of the Company and further, the layoffs were based on decreasing sales and the resulting financial uncertainty. The services of most of the laid off employees were discontinued, but the service of some of them were contracted out to external sales representatives.

Potential remedies

The decision of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Company leads towards the down turn of a number of employees from the organization. The argument of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Company was also ...