Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
Ozzy recently started working at a new company. He has been solicited several times to join the union of the company, but he would prefer not to. The union officials tell Ozzy that he won’t be allowed to keep working unless he joins the union. Which of the following is true?
-The union officials are pretending they have a closed shop and can't influence Ozzy's decision.
-The union can't make Ozzy join the union, but it can require him to pay union dues.
-Ozzy must now join the union because union shops are always legal.
-Ozzy's requirement to join the union depends on his state of employment.
Answer:
-The union can't make Ozzy join the union, but it can require him to pay union dues.
Explanation:
There is a law called the National Labor Relations Act that states that no employee should be required to be part of the union and that membership in the union should not be placed as a requirement for the occupation of a particular labor function. However, some states and some companies may adopt different approaches to their employees and the union.
In some states in the country, although an employee is not required to become a member of a union, they allow an obligation for all employees to be required to pay at least part of the union's dues. In this case, we can say that in relation to the case shown in the question above, the union can't make Ozzy join the union, but it can require him to pay union dues.
Answer: I think that the rule is very wrong and it is very foolish.
I think that if someone is breaking the law, we should be able to provide all the evidence we need to put this thief behind bars.
If nobody recorded, how else would the evidence get to the police?
If nobody recorded, the thief can say that he did not steal anything.
The Police and the Supreme Court need to have evidence that way there is no confusion and that way there is not anymore trouble.
Explanation:
Answer:
D.) United States v. Booker
Explanation:
