An unwillingness to pay a
union’s demands during negotiations is different than asserting a financial
inability to pay; an employer asserting only an unwillingness to pay does not
have a duty to produce information about its financial viability upon request
from the union; whether an employer asserted an inability-to-pay claim not
based on the use of magic words but on whether the essential core of the
employer’s bargaining posture as a whole, as expressed to the union, was
grounded in assertions amounting to a claim that it could not economically
afford to pay for the union’s proposals; a retraction is effective if the
employer makes it unmistakably clear to a union that it has abandoned its plea
of poverty.
For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/
About Me
- Eli Kantor
- Beverly Hills, California, United States
- Eli Kantor is a labor, employment and immigration law attorney. He has been practicing labor, employment and immigration law for more than 36 years. He has been featured in articles about labor, employment and immigration law in the L.A. Times, Business Week.com and Daily Variety. He is a regular columnist for the Daily Journal. Telephone (310)274-8216; eli@elikantorlaw.com. For more information, visit beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com and and beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com
Translate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment