Case review/analysis. See attached file for full problem description.
Did the Union violate Title 1, Section 101 (a) of th Landrum-Griffin Act in this case? If so what should be the appropriated remedy?
Yes, the Union did violate Title 1, Section 101 (a) of the Landrum-Griffin Act because of the following reasons:
Important issues such as union expenditures, salaries of officers, general complaint with regards to employer and different operational matters were discussed.
The Spanish translations that are performed for the benefits of other members attending the meeting, however, since bilingual local union officers provided the translation there can be doubts about the objectiveness of the translations.
Sanchez and others had requesting the Local I's officers that they be provided a qualified translator who was not a member of the Union but using a simple election process, this request was turned down.
Title 1, Section 101 (a) gives every member a right and privilege to attend membership meetings, and to participate in the deliberations and voting on the business of such meetings and to participate in the deliberate and voting on the business of such meetings; If there is no simultaneous impartial translation into Spanish this right guaranteed by Title 1, Section 101 (a) gets violated.
The remedy to ensure freedom of speech and assembly and facilitate that members express their views and understand the ...
This solution gives you a detailed discussion on Labor Law and Collective Bargaining