Question

John was offered a job at Rubber Makers International on the condition that he not join the union. His supervisor suggested that there might be a financial incentive after 90 days for adhering to this verbal contract. As the HR director, what concerns you most about this interaction?

A. This is a potential violation of the Wagner Act.
B. This is a potential violation of the Taft-Hartley Act.
C. This is a potential violation of the Norris-LaGuardia Act.
D. This is a potential violation of the WARN Act.

Answer 1

The concern for the HR director is a potential violation of the Wagner Act. Employment offers contingent on not joining a union contravene workers' rights to organize, which the Wagner Act was established to protect.Option A is the correct answer.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question raises concerns about a potential violation of labor laws pertaining to unions and worker rights. Specifically, the situation described suggests that John is being offered a job on the condition that he refrains from joining a union, which may hint at a violation of the National Labor Relations Act, commonly known as the Wagner Act. This act, established in 1935, aimed to protect the rights of workers to organize and to collectively bargain through unions, and made it illegal for employers to discriminate against workers for union membership. It also created the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to enforce these rights.

Given the description, the supervisor's offer implies that John's employment and potential financial incentive are contingent upon not exercising his right to unionize. As the HR director, the primary concern should be that this is a potential violation of the Wagner Act (A), which could lead to legal repercussions for the company if such practices are implemented and subsequently challenged. Considering the historical context and enforcement of the Wagner Act, it is clear that employers are prohibited from interfering with employees' rights to join unions.