HRMT 151 Employee And Labour Relations For Arbitration Case and proovide Short answers

Your assignment is to provide short answers [1–3 paragraphs] to the following questions related to that decision: 1. Do you support the decision reached by the arbitrator or would you have decided the matter differently – why or why not? More specifically, would you have a. found the employee not guilty of misconduct?
b. substituted a lesser penalty such as a suspension? 2. At paragraph 76, the arbitrator dismisses the grievor’s notion that the employer has set a precedent by accommodating “Mr. B” at KNPR while his driver’s licence was suspended. In your opinion, could the union have raised a legitimate estoppel argument – why or why not? 3. At paragraph 60, the grievor’s representative cites 7:2000 and 7:2300 of Canadian Labour Arbitration. Do you believe that these sections support the arguments being advanced on behalf of the grievor – why or why not? I have enclosed copies of these two sections of CLA in the documents area. 4. The arbitrator obviously believes that the grievor is being less than fully honest in regard to his testimony [see sections 68 and 71]. Do you feel this is a fair conclusion for the arbitrator to have reached – why or why not? 5. The employer’s representative states in reply to the union’s arguments that “The physical and verbal assaults towards Mr. Cook are sufficient grounds for the termination of employment.” Given that those events transpired outside of the workplace, do you support the employer’s representative’s conclusion – why or why not?

For faster services, inquiry about  new assignments submission or  follow ups on your assignments please text us/call us on  +1(629)-237-5579