CASE 4 Two months ago, GMFC decided to change its health care preferred provider organization (PPO) from the Central Indiana Medical Group (CIMG) to UniCare of Indiana, a local affiliate of UniCare of America. This shift has meant that GMFC employees must change from their present family doctors in CIMG to employee doctors of UniCare if they are to receive PPO coverage. If they remain with their present doctors, they will have to pay the difference in treatment costs between the UniCare and CIMG schedules, which are, on average, about 20 percent higher. In addition, UniCare does not cover some of the treatments offered by CIMG, such as chiropractic treatments when referred by a medical doctor. The union grieved this change, arguing the chosen provider would beexpected to remain in place over the term of the agreement. It argues that a significant negotiated benefit issue has been unilaterally changed by the employer and that employees' compensation would suffer as a result. The union has also filed a refusal-tobargain ULP charge with the NLRB. The company argues that Section 12.08 of the negotiated agreement permits it to choose the PPO. It further argues that none of the provisions of Section 12.08 has been changed. The company still stands ready to pay 80 percent of the first $2,500 in treatment provided by the PPO. It simply has made a business decision to change suppliers to maximize performance. 1. Should the grievance be sustained or denied? 2. If it should be sustained, what should the award be? 3. Has a ULP been committed? If so, what action can the NLRB take? Given the evidence in how the NLRB acts in cases where ULPs are charged, how would it likely rule? 1. Should the grievance be sustained or denied? 2. If it should be sustained, what should the award be? 3. Has a ULP been committed? If so, what action can the NLRB take? Given the evidence in how the NLRB acts in cases where ULPs are charged, how would it likely rule