Answer:
The statement " Effects bargaining is the bargaining over the wage, hour, and working condition consequences of managerial decisions which is mandatory for decisions such as facility closures and technological decisions" is false because it does not typically cover initial determinations regarding wages, hours, and working conditions, which are subjects for collective bargaining.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that effects bargaining is the bargaining over wage, hour, and working condition consequences of managerial decisions for actions like facility closures and technological decisions is false.
Effects bargaining actually refers to negotiations specifically related to the effects or consequences of management decisions, such as layoffs or plant closures, which are indeed mandatory subjects for bargaining when unions are involved. It does not typically cover initial determinations regarding wages, hours, and working conditions, which are subjects for collective bargaining.
Employers and employees often work under an implicit contract where employers try not to reduce wages during economic downturns, providing a form of insurance to employees.
Conversely, employees do not expect significant wage increases during economic upswings, creating a balance over time. This practice encourages loyalty and productivity among workers, as it offers them a sense of security.
When unions are involved and demand higher wages, employers may respond by investing in machinery, which can lead to union workers being more productive.
However, this could also result in the need for fewer workers due to increased automation and the use of advanced physical capital equipment.