Overt Salts Application Case Study

Words: 473
Pages: 2

1. Explain how the Company’s treatment of both the “covert” and “overt” salts applications for jobs compares to the recommended counter-salting steps for employers.
The union organized the employees of the company. On March 21 the employer placed an ad that they had openings for operators with CDL licenses and H & T (hazardous material handling endorsement. The union sent Castillo and Rivera to apply for the position as “cover salts” although they did not have the requirements stated in the ad. They were offered field technician and kept their union membership secret. Then the union sent a team to company’s office to apply for work as “overt” applicants. They applied for the same positions but were told to come back with their license and that currently they did not have any technician positions available. The secretary stated that they did not want to be a union shop. Her statement was evidence that they are antiunion animus. This action is considered to be unlawful and unfair for an employer to coerce employees with their rights guaranteed in section 7 of the NLRA. The company’s treatment to the covert and overt salts applications were different although both applicants did not have the knowledge required. The company does have the right not
…show more content…
Although there was a difference in treatment the company did follow the guidelines. The covert did not disclose that they were union members, but were offered another position because they did not have the a CDL license and H&T which were requirements. The overt’s came to apply for the operator’s position advertised and did disclose they were union members, but they already had full time employment elsewhere. They were unable to prove that they had the required licenses but were invited to follow-up with the application but did not make a further attempt to