Ms. Fortin Case Summary

Yes, I believe Ms. Fortin was a victim of union animus because her employer were not big supporter of unions. Few months prior to her dismissal, Ms. Fortin appeared on a union flyer; consequently, the relationship between Ms. Fortin and her employer were not the same. In addition, Ms. Fortin attended a hearing concerning unions representing her workplace. When she returned to work that day, her boss called her into the office and gave her a disciplinary warning. Furthermore, two days later Ms. Fortin received four additional disciplinary actions. Her supervisor claimed that customers said they received poor customer service from Ms. Fortin. In 1994, the company decided to restructured its company finance and a new manager took over Ms. Fortin’s department. Staff reduction was part of the change; consequently, Ms. Fortin was one of the first employee to get laid off. Unfortunately, when the new supervisor decided to laid off Ms. Fortin, she had no prior knowledge of Ms. Fortin’s union activity. For this reason, the court should uphold the supervisor decision. Her supervisor allegedly laid her off because of her poor performance evaluation and disciplinary actions that Ms. Fortin had in her file.

This law prohibit employer from committing unfair labor practices that might discourage employees from organizing or negotiating a union contracts. Although it is been more than 60 years, many employers still do not support unions. While I can understand the unions serve a good purpose in making sure its members earn decent and livable salaries, many companies sees them as detrimental to the effectiveness of the company. In addition, unions force employer to have less control of the company and CEO do not want