Respondent Railway Labor Executives' Association opposed this unilateral additional drug testing. The expansion of drug testing in FebruaryConrail argues, represents no more than a diagnostic improvement in its medical procedures, similar to diagnostic improvements Conrail unilaterally made in the past.
If an employer asserts a claim that the parties' agreement gives the employer the discretion to make a particular change in working conditions without prior negotiation, and if that claim is arguably justified by the terms of the parties' agreement, the employer may make the change and the courts must defer to the arbitral jurisdiction of the Adjustment Board.
In addition, Conrail has implemented the Federal Railroad Administration regulations recently upheld in Skinner against a Fourth Amendment challenge.
Whether the deal was motivated by fear or strategic positioning, the merger willimprove the competitive positioning of CSX, ultimately making the combined CSX-Conrail company extremely powerful in the industry. Historical Overview FPL Group is a far different company today than the one Jim Broadhead joined in January of when he became president and chief executive officer.
This further implies that the market does not believe at this point that Norfolk Southern will put forth what would be necessary to break the no talk clause in the CSX-Conrail agreement, and conversely influence the opt out vote-thus stopping the Conrail merger.
But it argues that the dispute in this case, properly viewed, is neither a major dispute nor a minor dispute. The court determined that the probative value was limited. Scaggs testified that he told Dr. Conrail argued that the surveillance evidence was not relevant, but even if it was relevant, it was not probative under Federal Rule of Evidence The universal container would promote better branding and it would open the business to international trade.
In particular, the parties take different views of how a court is to determine whether a particular past practice has risen to the level of an implied contractual term. Words: - Pages: 2 Regulations of Transportation Industries In its place, Conrail requested supplementary interrogatories of Sobek's putative testimony.
Words: - Pages: 26 Strategic Analysis of Csx The end result, however, is that the cases we will cover in this course are quite difficult.
They look to the acquisition of rights for the future, not to assertion of rights claimed to have vested in the past. Michigan bought it and the whole line was operated by Conrail for several years until it was sold to a short line.
There need be no "meeting of the minds" between the parties on the details of drug-testing methods or confidentiality standards for Conrail's current drug-testing program arguably to be justified by the parties' agreement.
Kirtley recommended that Scaggs stay home from work for 5 days. Conrail made written requests for the report in January and February. Norfolk Southern Corp.
It is clear that Conrail is not claiming a right, under its medical policy, to discharge an employee because of a single positive drug test, a right many railroads assert under Rule G. Offer of Therefore the market price does not reflect the information Question 4 The stand-alone bidders, CSS and Norfolk would value the target, Conrail, based on its fundamentals, however if both bidders are present they would enter price wars and legal battles, therefore this would inflate the offered price for the target.
It goes almost without saying that Dr. The Midwest market, where both firms were heavily present, would become a center of operations and the result would be a reduction of marginal costs. Schaffer testified on Scaggs behalf. The Acquisition of Consolidated Rail Corp.
(A) (HBS Case ) In midPennsylvania-based Consolidated Rail Corp. (Conrail), the third largest railroad in the Eastern United States, was approached with a merger offer from Virginia-based CSX Corp., the largest railroad.
Title: michaelferrisjr.com Author: Unknown Created Date: Tuesday, January 09, PM. Norfolk Southern offers ____ Analysis Case A, Question 1: Why is CSX interested in Conrail? How much should CSX pay for Conrail? The Stagger’s Rail Act of has created a deregulated environment in which acquisitions are used to improve the competitive positioning of existing companies within the railroad industry%(18).
CONRAIL CASE Question 1. a) Based on the information provided in the “A” case and especially in the Exhibit 7 the most that CSX should pay for Conrail should be $ 42 per share (calculations are attached hereto as Exhibit 1).
I assumed that the correct or required discount rate to be used in the [ ].
Case A. Question 1: Why is CSX interested in Conrail? How much should CSX pay for Conrail? Question 2a: Analyse the structure of the CSX-Conrail michaelferrisjr.com did CSX make a two tiered offer?
What effect does this structure have on the transaction? In order to answer the question, follow these steps: (a) Estimate the value of net synergies (using the WACC method of valuation) that would result from a CSX-Conrail merger and a Norfolk SouthernConrail merger, respectively.Conrail case qustion1