Business and Marketing Final Exam

COMPREHENSIVE FINAL EXAM

• This examination is worth 300 points and is modeled after a traditional law school examination.  The point breakdown for each question is listed on the questions themselves.


• The material in this test is based on the book contents, in class discussions/postings, and online materials discussed during the course. 


• All facts in this scenario are “self-contained” in that if the facts are not part of the below scenario they do not exist. 


• In addition, there is some intentional ambiguity in the scenario.  When you are asked to answer a question, and the facts are ambiguous, you should identify the ambiguity and explain how the ambiguity impacts your ability to answer the question. 


• I expect clear and concise writing such that I can understand your answers.  If I cannot understand your answers you will not get any points. 


• Your answers must be inline as part of this document.  If you are answering #13, the answer must be in the “Answer” section for question 13.    If you are answering a sub part of a question, you must note which sub part you are answering.  For example, if a question has 4 sub-parts, a, b, c, and d, be sure to label them as such in the answer block. 


• All answers should be your own work pursuant to the Maryville academic integrity policy.  All submissions will be checked with a tool that checks for plagiarism and if I confirm any plagiarism then you will not get any points for the question that contains plagiarism. 


• This final exam is unique to this class and has not been used before, so it does not exist on the internet.  Just want to save some of you the time and effort of looking around…

-----SCENARIO AND QUESTIONS----

Bryan works for Greenthumb! Inc., as a landscaping and beautification laborer.  On a bright, unusually warm sunny day in February, Bryan's supervisor directs Bryan to go Moody Park in Fairview Heights, Illinois, and plant a row of trees along a property line between the Park and some newly developed private residential homes.  The supervisor indicated that the property line was professionally surveyed a few days prior by the City of Fairview Heights Engineering Division, and that the engineers had marked the boundary line with large, 3-foot-tall orange stakes.  Bryan knew that although the Engineering Division was usually good at marking boundary lines, there were some recent incidents where they were allowing interns to do the marking and the interns had made some mistakes.  But, Bryan did not feel like that was his problem, and besides, he was paid to do landscaping, not to worry about property lines. 

Bryan arrived at Moody park, located the orange property line markers, and began carefuly digging holes only along the park side of the property line. 

As Bryan was digging the holes with a large shovel, the owner of the home and land on the other side of the orange cones, who goes by Jennifer, ran out the back door of her house and began frantically yelling at Bryan that he was digging holes in Jennifer’s backyard and that Bryan was trespassing.  Jennifer then rapidly approached Bryan, got within 12 feet of him, and continued to scream at Bryan that he was to immediately leave her property.  Bryan, confused by the raw display of anger and vitriol, and being sure that he was on park property, did not move and instead yelled back to Jennifer that he was on park property and that she was more than welcome to call the cops.  Bryan’s comments caused Jennifer to fly into a rage.  She rapidly approached Bryan and came within 2 feet of him before she continued to scream about him leaving her property, cursed Bryan’s good name, and made other offensive, shocking, and racist comments about Bryan’s mother and children.  Bryan, normally pretty level headed, became enraged, and in a moment of anger, swung his shovel at Jennifer’s head.  Although Bryan swung, he missed.  As Jennifer jumped back in shock, she continued to scream at Bryan and mock him in a way that questioned his masculinity and ability to swing a shovel.  Now further enraged, Bryan advanced on Jennifer and swung, this time not hitting Jennifer directly but coming close enough that the shovel brushed Jennifer’s clothing. 

Sensing the close call, Jennifer became very concerned for her safety and started to run back into her home with the intention of calling the police.  As she ran into her home, she tripped, fell, and landed hard on her left elbow.  Although Jennifer was not a doctor, she knew that she had either broken or seriously injured her left elbow because she was unable to bend her left arm at the elbow without extreme pain.  As Jennifer picked herself up off the ground, she turned around to see if Bryan was following her.  As she turned, she saw that Bryan had not followed her into her home, and instead, was standing in the same spot as before but pointing at Jennifer and laughing hysterically. 

Jennifer, now consumed with a mix of embarrassment, rage, pain, and fear, continued to retreat until she was safely in her home.  She began to call the police, but as she was dialing 911, her rage overwhelmed her and she decided she was going to take matters into her own hands and teach Bryan a lesson.  Opening her gun safe, she withdrew her favorite firearm, a STI DVC Tactical 2011 .45 ACP, and made sure it had a fully loaded magazine. Running back outside, kicking the safety off, and with adrenaline and pain coursing through her veins, she ran up to Bryan, and with the gun a mere 10 inches from Bryan’s forehead, screamed at him to get off her property.  Bryan realized at this point that he had brought a shovel to a gun fight, and seeing as how he was not even very good at aiming a shovel, decided it was best to quickly retreat by running to his vehicle and driving away. 

As Bryan got about a block away, a police car appeared and pulled him over.  The officers, initially just 2 but soon thereafter several more, initiated a felony stop by ordering Bryan out of his vehicle and onto the ground.  Bryan, again deciding that it was best to comply, did as he was told.  Once the police handcuffed Bryan they attempted to ask him questions.  Bryan, remembering what he had learned in his Maryville MBA business law class he was taking, said that he would not talk to the police without a lawyer.  The police obliged, arrested Bryan, took him to the police station, and placed him in a holding cell until his $400 an hour attorney could be bothered to arrive at the jail.  A few hours later, as Bryan was contemplating life, he looked out his narrow glass window and saw Jennifer with her hands handcuffed in front of her and her left elbow in an awkward looking sling.  Bryan later asked one of the guards what had happened, and the guard stated that a neighbor had called the police when the screaming start and had also reported the incident with the gun when they saw Jennifer come running out of the house pointing a pistol at Bryan.  The officer explained this is why they ultimately arrested both Bryan and Jennifer, since it appeared that both had committed crimes based on the evidence they had.

After both Bryan and Jennifer sat in jail for a few days, they were both released on large personal recognizance bonds.  Both Bryan and Jennifer were very angry at what occurred and ordered their respective attorneys to file civil lawsuits against the other for “everything and anything” that their respective attorneys could come up with. 

1. 1.      Jennifer sues Bryan for the intentional tort of trespass, and demands Bryan pay her $100,000,000 and that he stays off her land forever.   
   
   
   1. Will Jennifer prevail in her demand for $100,000,000? Explain.
   
   
   2. Will Jenifer likely prevail in her demand that Bryan stay off her land forever?  Explain   
   
   
   3. Identify and discuss Bryan’s best defense against Jennifer’s demand for $100,000,000 and that he stay off her land forever. 
   
   

1. 2.      Jennifer sues Bryan for the tort of assault and the tort of battery. 
   
   
   1. Will Jennifer prevail in her claim that Bryan committed the tort of Assault? Why?
   
   
   2. Will Jennifer prevail in her claim that Bryan committed the tort of Battery?  Why?
   
   

1. 3.      Bryan also sues Jennifer for the tort of assault and the tort of battery. 
   
   
   1. Will Bryan prevail in his claim that Jennifer committed the tort of Assault? Why?  
   
   
   2. Will Bryan prevail in his claim that Jennifer committed the tort of Battery? Why?
   
   

1. 4.      Jennifer’s lawsuit also names Greenthumb! as a defendant in her suit and argues that Greenthumb! is liable for Bryan’s actions. 
   
   
   1. Explain what principle(s) might allow Jennifer to successfully argue that Greenthumb! is liable for Bryan’s actions  
   
   
   2. If you were Greenthumb!’s lawyers, what might you argue as to why Greenthumb! is not responsible?   
   
   

1. 5.      The events that led both Bryan and Jennifer to end up in jail and ensnared in multiple lawsuits took place in Fairview Heights, Illinois.   Bryan, thinking that the judges in Fairview Heights are weak, worried that jurors in the area will likely side with Jennifer, and knowing that juries in the City of St. Louis pay out large damage awards, asks his lawyer to file suit against Jennifer in the State of Missouri’s 22^nd Circuit Court in downtown St. Louis.
   
   
   1. Will Bryan’s lawyer be able to file suit against Jennifer in the 22^nd Circuit Court? Why?
   
   
   2. If both Bryan and Jennifer were residents of Fairview Heights Illinois, but the whole incident happened in Forest Park in the City of St. Louis, would your answer change?  Why? 
   
   

After getting out of jail and having a few weeks to reflect on what occurred, Jennifer and Bryan finally have their first day in civil court.  The Judge spends the first 15 minutes talking in what appears to be code words to Bryan and Jennifer’s lawyers.  Once done talking with the lawyers, the Judge looks to Bryan and Jennifer and asks if they are ready to proceed with their civil suit.  He reminds them that this will be a jury trial, the trial will likely take 5 days, and because the court docket is full, the trial won’t start for about 6 months.  Bryan, not liking what he hears, asks for a brief recess to talk to his lawyer.

 Bryan asks his lawyer what this is all going to cost him and is it really going to be 6 months until the trial starts?  Bryan’s lawyer states that he expects to put in about 100 hours preparing for the trial and initial motions, another 60 hours during the trial, and up to another 100 hours after the trial doing post-trial motions, any appeals, and other miscellaneous work. He also mentions that trial is just the first phase, and since millions of dollars might be on the line, there will likely be appeals and other matters that will stretch out this litigation for years.  Bryan, not being a math major, remembers that the lawyer bills at $400 per hour, so figures that just this trial is going to cost around $100,000.  Bryan tells his lawyer he can’t afford to pay $100,000 for this, and certainly can’t afford to pay even more for any appeals or other matters.  Bryan’s lawyer politely informs him that he would be happy to perform all for the services mentioned for a flat fee of only $35,000 (not to include appeals) and that he could certainly offer a payment plan with a reasonable interest rate of only 18%. The lawyer opens his briefcase and pulls out a contract for Bryan to sign then and there, agreeing to the verbal terms.  Bryan, feeling sick to his stomach thinking about that kind of money, but feeling like he has no other choice, agrees to the lawyer’s offer and signs the contract without even reading it.  His lawyer flashes a big grin and files the contract in his briefcase.

While Bryan was having this conversation with his lawyer, Jennifer was having the same conversation with her lawyer.  However, Jennifer’s lawyer, being slightly more ethical and sympathetic to his client, suggests that instead of trial, perhaps Jennifer should consider binding arbitration for the civil matters.  Jennifer, who initially wanted sweet, sweet vengeance against Bryan, but now feeling exhausted and embarrassed by the whole affair (not to mention losing her job when the story showed up on Facebook and in the local newspaper) just wants to put this whole thing behind her.  Therefore, she agrees with her lawyer that binding arbitration is likely the way to go since she can’t really afford a drawn out civil trial and does not have the “heart” to go through with this anymore. 

The Judge, growing impatient with all the side conversation, calls the courtroom to order and asks for the party’s decision on whether to proceed.  Bryan tells the Judge that he wants to go forward with a civil trial while Jennifer says that she wants to try mediation or binding arbitration.  After the judge explains what it is and how it would work, Bryan thinks that it is probably the best approach since it saves him money, and in any event, he can get his revenge against Jennifer in any forum because he knows he is the true victim in all of this.  However, Bryan’s lawyer says that a civil trial is best because it will get Bryan the largest damages at the end.  Bryan follows his lawyer’s advice and tells the Judge he wants a civil jury trial.  The Judge considers both sides position and orders the parties to attempt mediation or other informal resolution first, and if that fails, they must attend arbitration. 

The next week, the parties sit down with a mediator and try to reach resolution. 

1. If Bryan’s lawyer attempts to use positional negotiation during the mediation or informal resolution process, is the lawyer likely to be successful based on the facts presented above?  Why?


2. If, on the other hand, Jennifer’s lawyers attempt to use a form of principled negotiation during the mediation or informal resolution process, is the lawyer likely to succeed.  Why? For full points, be sure to discuss in detail at least four elements as discussed in the textbook on this topic.


3. What are the advantages and disadvantages to both parties of attempting an informal resolution, negotiated settlement, or mediation, rather than proceeding on to binding arbitration?

Ultimately, the mediation fails.  The parties file a request for alternative dispute resolution in the form of an arbitration proceeding with a single impartial arbitrator appointed by the Court.  The arbitration starts two weeks later and lasts 3 days. 

1. What impact, if any, does the Federal Arbitration Act have on the arbitration between Jennifer and Bryan? Be sure to explain your answer. 

At the end, the arbitrator added up all the various damages and findings, and concludes Jennifer owes Bryan $125,000.  Jennifer, stunned by the result, began to cry.  Turning to her lawyer, she asked if she was really going to have to pay $125,000, to which the lawyer responded that once the arbitrator’s judgment is entered by the Court, Bryan could come after her to collect the money. 

1. Can either Jennifer or Bryan appeal the arbitrator’s award of damages to the Court?  Explain why or why not in detail.

Bryan, feeling vindicated, began to dream of what he was going to do with his money.  Just as he imagined himself driving around in his new Ferrari, his lawyer pulled him aside and presented his bill.   To Bryan’s shock, the lawyer’s bill was for 185 hours of work, including the time spent in the actual arbitration, at $400 per hour, for a total of $74,000.  At this point, Bryan began to cry.  The lawyer then told Bryan it will be an additional $400 per hour for each hour of work trying to collect the money from Jennifer, it is unlikely Bryan would see any of the money from Jennifer because all her assets were seized as part of the criminal case against her, and that Bryan had to pay the lawyer’s bill even if he did not collect anything from Jennifer.  Bryan really began to cry. 

However, Bryan remembered that he had a contract with his lawyer and immediately demanded that the lawyer honor the $35,000 flat fee.  The lawyer, being a lawyer, produced a copy of the contract Bryan had signed and points to some fine print in 6-point font on the back of the contract stating the contract did not apply to arbitration actions.  Bryan also notices that nearly half the page is covered in fine print and conditions that he did not read when he had signed it on the verge of the trial.  Bryan, feeling cheated, offers the lawyer $35,000 cash money on the spot, or alternatively, tells the lawyer that he is free to try and sue Bryan for the larger $74,000 legal bill.  The lawyer smiles, grabs his briefcase, and walks out of the room.  Just as he reaches the door he turns to Bryan and, with a sinister grin, says that he will be in touch soon. 

11.  Assuming for this question only that Bryan and the lawyer had a valid contract -  was the contract a bilateral contract or unilateral contract?  Why?

12.  Is the contract between Bryan and his lawyer enforceable?  Answer by discussing each of the five elements of an enforceable contract and how they suggest an answer to this question.  Where there is ambiguity in the facts above, highlight the ambiguity and discuss potential outcomes if additional facts are known. 

Bryan and Jennifer, although on opposite sides of the courtroom, both decide they are done with the legal system, lawyers, judges, or anything else to do with the law.  As they are leaving the courtroom, they briefly make eye contact. This leads Jennifer to think that to put this all behind her she is going to apologize to Bryan so that she can move on with her life.  As she approaches Bryan, and begins to apologize, Bryan is overcome with guilt and remorse for what he has done and for his feelings of anger and vindictiveness towards Jennifer.  As they talk, they learn that they have a lot in common and that they are more alike than not.  As the conversation progresses Bryan admits that although he was terrified of Jennifer when she aimed her gun at his head, he admired her good taste in quality firearms by admitting that he too owned a STI DVC Tactical 2011 .45 ACP pistol.  With that, the two began dating and quickly fell in love.  A few months later, with love in the air, the two decide to ask the Judge to dismiss all the civil lawsuits.  They also agree that they will not to testify against each other in their upcoming criminal trials. 

13.  Will Bryan or Jennifer succeed in asking the Judge to set aside the arbitrator’s verdict? 

Thinking this was all over, and with plans to have a wedding next summer, Jennifer and Bryan moved into Bryan’s apartment and began making plans on how to spend unreasonable amount of money on their “special day.”  During this process, Bryan began to read about the trickery and marketing behind the wedding industry, and decides he must convince Jennifer to have a simple wedding at a pavilion in Forest Park rather than an expensive event at the Four Seasons downtown.  Although this started as a conversation, it quickly became heated because Jennifer wanted a fairytale Disney princess wedding and Bryan felt that a grown woman should not be so delusional as to want to emulate a childhood fictional character, particularly one backed by so much deceptive and manipulative marketing.  Jennifer, feeling like her childhood dream of a princess wedding was evaporating, and noting the wedding was “her” special day, became enraged. Bryan did not help by repeatedly antagonizing Jennifer and making sarcastic remarks about her “dream.”  As Jennifer often does when she becomes enraged, she turned towards violence to express herself.  Based on the initial display of violence, Bryan called the police.  When the police arrived, and threatened to arrest both of them for domestic violence, Jennifer realized this was not a healthy relationship and that she needed to move away. 

After Jennifer left the apartment, she decided to make a clean break for it and move to the Twin Cities.  In Minneapolis, Jennifer obtained a job working at a Caribou Coffee (which, as we all know, is vastly superior to Starbucks). While working there, she is quickly recognized as a high performer and promoted to the corporate office in Minnesota to work as part of the company’s intellectual property and consumer protection compliance group.  This group works to ensure Caribou’s trademarks, copyrights, and other intellectual property is not being used improperly or in a way that negatively impacts the company, and that Caribou’s practices meet federal and state laws for safe food handling. 

One day while Jennifer is working, she is alerted to a coffee stand located in the Saint Louis area that is incorporated as “Bryan’s Superior Caribou Coffee” and that is using logos and graphics that use the same color and appearance as the real Caribou Coffee.  Caribou had recently moved into the Saint Louis area so they were on guard for copycats popping up.  Jennifer, not believing her luck and looking for a little revenge, and quietly wondering how it was possible she is working for a coffee company and Bryan opened a coffee shop, quickly goes to the Caribou lawyers and convinces them to immediately file an intellectual property lawsuit against Bryan for $1,000,000 along with a demand that he cease and desist using the term “Bryan’s Superior Caribou Coffee” and “all associated marks, livery, and colors” that are owned by Caribou Coffee. 

14.   Explain whether Caribou Coffee’s intellectual property lawsuit will be successful.  In answering, be sure to explain any ambiguity and which way you resolve it and why. 

Jennifer also notices in Bryan’s online pictures that he is not handling his food sanitation procedures correctly.  Jennifer decides to alert the local authorities about the potential public health hazard.  A few days later, authorities make an unannounced inspection of Bryan’s coffee operation and cite it for several violations.  While the health inspectors do not shut the coffee shop down, the incident makes news and substantially reduces Bryan’s business and revenue.  Bryan, never one to back down, sees this situation as one where a large corporation is trying to run “the little guy” out of town with bogus harassment and intimidation by using the legal system.  In response, Bryan files a lawsuit against Caribou Coffee under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, arguing that Caribou is attempting to monopolize interstate commerce by driving small coffee shops out of business in areas that Caribou competes with small coffee shops.  During discovery, it comes to light that Caribou does have a policy of using “anonymous tips to the health department” as one method of limiting competition in certain markets.  However, Caribou’s lawyers point out in a court filing that Caribou is not the largest player in this market and therefore does not have monopoly power so its actions are not a violation of the law.

15.  Explain whether Bryan might have a successful case against Caribou under Section 2 of the Sherman Act?  Explain any assumptions you make in answering this question. 

While all the above was going on, another legal matter was working through in the background.  Although omitted in the story above, while Bryan was sitting in jail after the initial arrest, the Greenthumb! supervisor arrived, and through a two-inch opening in the visitation cell, told Bryan he was fired for violating “company policy” and Greenthumb!’s “standards of ethical conduct.”  The owner just could not understand how this had spiraled out of control and was furious that all of the news coverage of this incident included images and video of Bryan in his Greenthumb! uniform.  However, in a strange and lucky coincidence, several weeks later, the criminal charges against Bryan are dropped! 

As Bryan was working through his issues with Jennifer, he hired a separate attorney to sue Greenthumb! for wrongful termination for a variety of reasons.  During the legal proceeding, evidence indicated Greenthumb! had no “company policies,” did not have a code of ethics, and did not have a code of conduct.  However, it did have a handbook that specifically stated that the company would not terminate an employee for engaging in “civic actions,” would not fire an employee who was charged with a crime but was later acquitted or the charges were dropped, and repeatedly said all employees were “at-will” employees at all times.    

16.  Provide one argument as to how Bryan might prevail in his wrongful termination lawsuit.  Then, take the opposite position, and discuss why Bryan might not prevail in his lawsuit against Greenthumb! 

Bryan ultimately prevails in his civil lawsuit against Greenthumb!, which ends up nearly bankrupt from Bryan’s lawsuit.  Greenthumb! has several creditors (people who Greenthumb! owes money) that are demanding payment.  Eventually, Greenthumb! ran out of money and stopped paying, which caused the creditors to sue Greenthumb!’s owner personally for payment of the debts.  At first the owner of Greenthumb tried to hide behind the corporate veil.  However, the owner had been sloppy in some elements of organizing his business, which included organizing the business as a sole proprietorship.  As a sole proprietorship, he did not have strong protection from liability. Eventually, this fact caught up with him during one of the lawsuits and a creditor was able to seize the owner’s personal assets to settle the debt.  As part of the overall deal to settle the lawsuit, the creditor obtained operational control over Greenthumb! As a going concern. 

17.  Identify at least 3 other organizational/legal business structures that Greenthumb!’s owner could have selected that would have provided at least some liability protection for his personal assets in the above situation.   Of these 3, identify one of them and explain why you think that option would be the best based on what you know about this scenario. 

After all the legal matters were behind him, including the wrongful termination, criminal issues, and the intellectual property and anti-trust lawsuits, Bryan was happily running his own coffee kiosk part time and was re-hired by the new owners of Greenthumb! To work full time again.  On a crazy hot, humid day in August, a Greenthumb! supervisor directs Bryan to go to Queeny Park in Ballwin, Missouri, to plant a row of trees.  The supervisor gives Bryan a map and specific directions on where to plant the trees and is very specific that Bryan should be sure to plant the trees where indicated on the map.  The Supervisor also highlights a nearby residential development that shares a border with the park and states the shared border is within a few feet of the spot where Bryan is to plant the trees.  Bryan tells his supervisor that he is concerned about being so close to the border between the park and the residential area, but the supervisor assured Bryan that the City of Ballwin Engineering Division professional staff had recently surveyed the location. 

Upon arrival at the site, Bryan looks at the map and his notes, studied the area, and quickly realized the Engineering Division mismarked the boundary lines.  It was also clear that someone other than the professional staff had done the work given the sloppy marking, wrong color of the marking lines, and a few places where “lol” and “OMFG” were written in the grass with bright yellow marking paint.  Also, a friend had recently told Bryan that the Engineering Division professional staff had been allowing summer interns to do the marking and the interns had made some mistakes in the recent past.   

Bryan felt like he had been in this situation before, recalling his problems back in February out in Fairview Heights.  Given his past experiences in an oddly coincidental situation, Bryan decided to take the prudent approach this time and called to ask the Engineering Division’s professional staff to come and quickly fix the issue so that he could get on with planting trees.  However, after 15 minutes on hold listening to K-pop songs, the professional staff told Bryan it would take at least 2 weeks to return to the site to remark it.  Bryan grumbled to himself because he knew some of the professional staff was unionized, while some were not, and it was clear he was talking to one of the union guys.  The voice on the phone also mentioned that Destiny 2 was just released on PS4, and that only the unionized staff was going to be busy during work time playing the game on PS4.  Bryan was a bit stunned by the call and decided it was his civic duty to tweet the experience with hashtags #MAGA #Antifa #GovFail. 

After tweeting, Bryan decided he had performed his civic obligation to shine a light on the situation and that he needed to get back to work.  Bryan then reflected that his supervisor had been very clear about where to plant the trees and that even if the markings were a bit off, Bryan could just manually adjust by a few feet to make sure he was within park boundaries rather than on private property.  Besides, what are the chances that there would be two Jennifer’s in the world?  Bryan also decided not to inform his supervisor again, and figuring the offset was sufficient, went to work digging holes and planting trees.  

Unbeknownst to Bryan, because he had a cheap cell phone plan with limited signal pretty much everywhere, Bryan’s tweet went viral – on the right and the left of the political spectrum.  Within 20 minutes a mob had assembled in front of city hall demanding the mayor terminate the professional staff immediately.  The mob felt it was an outrage that city employees were brazenly refusing to work and instead felt they were entitled to pay while sitting around playing video games.  The mayor, acting in good political tradition, did not know how to react so he panicked and announced publicly that he was terminating the professional staff effective immediately.  After he issued the public statement, and with a few shots of whiskey to calm himself down, the mayor decided he needed to talk to his lawyer.  The city’s lawyer listened to the situation and was not pleased.  The city’s lawyer made it clear that the mayor’s actions were going to cause some problems because the mayor did not follow proper administrative procedure (outlined in State and Federal law) to terminate the non-unionized city employees, and he failed to follow the collective bargaining agreement when he terminated the unionized employees.  The lawyer indicated this was probably going to cost the cities millions of dollars in litigation and costs – unless of course the mayor could reach a deal with the employees to prevent them from suing.  The mayor, knowing that if he re-hired the employees he would be run out of office, but also realizing that the lawyer was right - decided to “split the difference” by deciding only to fire the unionized professional staff rather than the non-union staff.  He figured this way he only had one battle to fight, and besides, the mayor did not care much for unions.  The mayor, feeling shrewd, and knowing this would play well with his base, figured this would satisfy everyone and he would keep his job.  Depending on how it plays out, he thought he might even get elected to a state representative seat.  Outside, the professional staffs’ union representative and lawyer observed this decision and decided to file an unfair labor practice complaint with the appropriate federal entity, and file a complaint to the State Administrative Employment Board, which is an official administrative agency tasked with dealing with unionized employee termination appeals. 

18.   Explain whether you believe the management (the mayor/city) committed an unfair labor practice by firing only the unionized professional staff in the above situation.  For this question you can assume that a city government is equivalent to any standard corporation. 

19.  The State Administrative Employment Board is a State level administrative agency charged with adjudicating labor disputes under the State’s administrative laws and regulations.   The adjudication process is overseen by a state administrative law judge.  Identify at least 3 problems with administrative agencies and/or the administrative appeals and adjudication process.

During the unfair labor practice hearing, the fact that only the unionized professional staff were playing PS4 while on the clock came up.  Interviews and evidence indicated that the unionized professional staff were playing PS4 because they were engaging in an unsanctioned and uncertified “mini-strike” because the other professional staff had not joined the union.  The unionized professional staff, and their union representative, figured their actions would force management (the city) to effectively force the non-unionized employees to join the union, and most importantly, for them to pay their dues. 

20.  Identify at least two possible ways that the union might have committed an unfair labor practice in this situation.