th respect to large unions with a national presence, should prerogatives at the local or national level take higher priority when negotiating new agreements with employers?

1. With respect to large unions with a national presence, should prerogatives at the local or national level take higher priority when negotiating new agreements with employers? For example, if a new union were voted in to represent Walmart employees, would it be better if the union negotiated one big nation-wide contract for all stores and all employees? Or would it be better for the union to negotiate different terms at the individual store level (i.e. treating each store as a separate employer)? Explain your reasoning.

The work of a labor union is important in as far as representing the interests of its members is concerned. In most cases, unions will have representation right from local level to the national level. The question however arises whether representation should be at local or national level when need for negotiation

2. Insofar as impasses are concerned, do you think the rules concerning the use of strikes and lockouts are fair and balanced between unions and employers? Does either side have stronger leverage with respect to these tools? Why or why not?

Use of strikes and lockouts can be one of the effective ways that employers and employees can solve their grievances over collective bargaining agreements. Even though such options may disrupt the normal operations of a given organization, the interests of employees are protected in law and they…