1. What is the purpose of collective bargaining by unions, and why is would it be potentially so damaging to Wal-Mart to allow unions in its U.S. stores?

Collective bargaining allows for strength in numbers; the more workers asking for the same thing, the more likely they are to get it without having to fight one another in the process. U.S. unions have been fighting more for benefits than wages over the last few years, so Wal-Mart would face significant cost increases were it to engage in collective bargaining with American unions.

2. If Chinese unions don't engage in collective bargaining, why do you think they even have unions?

Answers vary; have the students focus on items other than wages or benefits. Unions could act as watchdog groups, etc; and since China still operates as a relatively egalitarian society (present market interactions excluded) then the need for collective bargaining is not there. You may need to inform students a bit about China's past as a communist country and discuss the differences between a communist economy and a capitalist one.

3. What would Chinese workers gain by striking against Wal-Mart?

Answers will vary; again, since unions don't bargain with the firm, it would be about highlighting problems than seeking change or compensation. You may need to address the political ramifications of China's demands for unionization as opposed to any true motivation in favor of workers.

Multiple Choice/True False Questions