This is Business Law question about unionized Labour.

Please discuss all relevant issue and please discuss to what to extent (if at all) that minimalist perception still prevails.

Trade unions acquired the right to file an unfair labour practice complaint on their own behalf in 1974. Immediately thereafter, a number of complaints were filed with the Board in which it was alleged that an employer had failed to comply with the duty to bargain in good faith. The first decision to issue was United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America v. DeVilbiss (Canada) Ltd., [1976] OLRB Rep. March 49 in which the Board identified the functions served by the duty to bargain in good faith as follows:

ADAMS, Vice Chair:a … a very important function of section 14 [now section 17] is that of reinforcing an employer’s obligation to recognize a trade union lawfully selected by employees as their bargaining agent. Certainly the freedom to join a trade union of one’s choice declared in section 3 of the legislation would be but an edict “writ on water” if an employer could enter into negotiations with no intentions of ever signing a collective agreement. But we believe the duty to meet and make every reasonable effort to make a collective agreement has an even more important function in a modern society that for the most part accepts that trade unions have legitimate and important roles to play. That is to say that the duty assumes that when two parties are obligated to meet each other periodically and rationally discuss their mutual problems in a way that satisfies the phrase “make every reasonable effort”, they are likely to arrive at a better understanding of each other’s concerns thereby enhancing the potential for a resolution of their differences without recourse to economic sanctions – the impact of which is never confined to the immediate parties of an industrial dispute. At the very least rational discussion is likely to minimize the number of problems the parties are unable to resolve without the use of economic weapons thereby focusing the parties’ attention in the eleventh hour on the “true” differences between them. … Hence it is our belief that the duty described in section 14 has at least two principal functions. The duty reinforces the obligation of an employer to recognize the bargaining agent and, beyond this somewhat primitive though important purpose, it can be said that the duty is intended to foster rational, informed discussion thereby minimizing the potential for “unnecessary” industrial conflict. 

Ingram Barge Co. had revenues of $750 million last year. The operating profit margin is 21%, and the net profit margin is 11%. The growth rate is 4%.

Ingram Barge’s book value of equity equal to $510 million, and book value of debt is equal to $440 million. The (equity) market capitalization is $862 million. IBCs debt consists entirely of 7.0 percent coupon, semi-annual bonds with 12 years remaining until maturity. The bonds are currently selling for 105.5% of par with a YTM of 6.338%. The required return on equity capital is estimated to be 9.25%, and the tax rate for IBC is 24%.

a. Compute the WACC for Ingram Barge Co. Show all work.

b. Compute the EVA for Ingram Barge.

General Instructions for all Chapter Problem Assignments:

• Follow these General Instructions AND the specific chapter instructions below.
• Each Chapter Problem has multiple parts. Follow the instructions for each part.
• Go to myLearning, and click on Discussions. Under the Discussion Forum – Chapter 6 Problems – click on the topic, Sample Assignment with Formatting. This will show you how to format your answers. You should also review the Rubric to see how your work will be graded. The Rubric link is at located below.
• It is recommended to type the answers using word processing software. 
• This way you can use the spelling/grammar check and the word count tools. 
• You then can copy and paste directly into the myLearning Discussions tool. Need to answers in the HTML Editor; do NOT attach a file.
• Using word processing software also allows you to have a back-up copy of your work if something goes wrong with your internet connection.
• For Web-Hybrid and Face-to-Face sections, print your work (either from your word processing software or from myLearning Discussions.
• After typing, type each part name (Part I, Part II, Part III, and Part IV) followed by your answer. You can use bullets or numbering in your answers. Do NOT retype the questions/instructions. Do NOT attach a file. Your answers need to be in the message area so that all students have easy access to review.
• The Chapter Problems are setup so that you cannot edit or delete a thread or reply. If you mess up with a thread/reply, just start a new thread/reply — except add a note in the Subject (like, Sam’s Answers – Please grade this one). If you need a thread/reply deleted, contact your professor.
• 500 words needed , and 150 words for your revision.

Chapter 6 Problems Instructions

Part I: Essay #4 on page 162

• Reference the law at issue.
• Evaluate the widow’s argument. Remember to discuss each element of the law.
• Include what you think will happen. 

Part II: Review the following hypothetical

• Pharma, Inc. manufactures herbal supplements. It created an herbal supplement called XLT to increase weight loss. Pharma complied with all FDA regulations. In addition, Dr. Mitchell, a Pharma researcher, conducted a 6-month study of XLT. Dr. Mitchell’s report stated that there were no side effects. Bob bought XLT directly from Pharma’s website. He took double the recommended dosage for one week because he needed to lose weight fast; he had a 10-year high school reunion coming up. At the end of the week, Bob was hospitalized for abdominal pain. The hospital discovered that the XLT pills in Bob’s possession contained a small amount of rat poison. Bob suffered injury from the poisoning, but eventually recovered. Pharma investigated the claim and discovered that one batch of XLT was contaminated when Dr. Mitchell accidentally dropped rat poison into the process, and the inspector did not test that particular batch. Industry standards do not require inspections of every batch, only random inspections. This is the only instance of poisoning from the affected XLT batch. Bob sues Pharma for Product Liability based on Strict Liability.
• Evaluate both Bob’s and Pharma’s argument for each element of the law.
• Include the result that you think will happen.

Part III: Discussion Question #1 on page 162

• Comment on the case under the law discussed in this chapter.
• Include whether the result was reasonable.

Submitting your Answers

• Review the General Instructions above.
• Go to myLearning, and click on Discussions.
• Under the Discussion Forum – Chapter 6 Problems – click on the topic, Chapter 6 Problems: Answers. Note that you will not see any other student postings until you post your answers.
• Click on – Start a New Thread.
• Add a descriptive subject, like “Sam’s Answers”
• Copy/paste your answers into the HTML Editor tool. (type answers directly in the HTML Editor; however, see the warnings in the General Instructions above. 
• Do NOT attach a file. Your answers need to be in the message area.
• Must have 500 words
• Click – Post
• Note – If you are in a Face-to-Face or Web-Hybrid section, print your work and bring it to class unless your instructor says otherwise.
• Once you have discussed or reviewed other students’ posts, you will edit your answers in this topic. The Edits have a different due date. This assignment will be graded after you have posted your answers and posted your edits.
• Sample Assignment with Formatting
• Discussion Topic
• Part I
• The law at issue here is . . .
• The first element is . . . It requires . . . The facts here show . . .
• The second element is . . . It requires . . . The facts here show . . .
• The third element is . . . It requires . . . The facts here show . . .
• The fourth element is . . . It requires . . . The facts here show . . .
• The fifth element is . . . It requires . . . The facts here show . . .
• The defenses to this law include . . . They do/do not apply here because . . .
• I think the result will be . . .
• Part II
• The law at issue here is Product Liability using Strict Liability.
• The first element is . . . It requires . . . Bob will argue . . . Pharma will argue . . .
• The second element is . . . It requires . . . Bob will argue . . . Pharma will argue . . .
• The third element is . . . It requires . . . Bob will argue . . . Pharma will argue . . .
• The fourth element is . . . It requires . . . Bob will argue . . . Pharma will argue . . .
• The fifth element is . . . It requires . . . Bob will argue . . . Pharma will argue . . .
• It think the result will be . . .
• Part III
• The law abount compensatory damages is . . . 
• The law about punitive damages is . . .
• I believe the result was . . .

Henrietta transfers cash of $281,600 and equipment with a fair market value of $84,480 (basis to her as a sole proprietor, $33,792) in exchange for a 40% profit and loss interest worth $366,080.

If an amount is zero, enter “0”.

a. Henrietta has a realized gain of $ and recognizes a gain of $.

b. Henrietta’s basis in the partnership interest is $.

c. The partnership’s basis in the equipment is $

Look at Armenia. The money supply growth rate and the average rate of inflation are 120%. If the growth rate in real GDP was 80%, the percent change in velocity would be