Based on the Case below, Write a brief explanation that explains why the case represents its particular ACHE competency domain. (Be sure that the explanation justifies the assigned competency domain based upon the facts and circumstances of the case.) Case: Case 2: Professionalism The pressure was mounting with the nursing rank and file that nursing needed to become part of a bargaining unit. There were signs and indications in all three hospitals and one nursing facility that some level of organization was being attempted by the professional nursing association. Pamphlets supporting this association were seem in the cafeterias of these institutions. Directors of nursing units were reporting that some of their staff members were openly discussing the benefits of organizing in staff meetings and while performing their duties. All of this was causing stress for the nursing supervisors and leadership. They sensed a reduction in productivity and an increase in morale issues. After six months of this type of activity, the Vice President of Nursing decided to take action. She informed all of her directors and managers that no discussion of this matter would be tolerated during working hours. She also stressed that any literature being distributed to encourage membership in a bargaining unit would be grounds for disciplinary action. It was as if the battle lines were being drawn and the very culture of nursing was being threatened. The president of the health system decided that such a rigid position by Nursing administration as counter-productive and would cause more issues than solve any problems related to the issue of bargaining representation. In discussion with his Chief Human Resource Officer and the lead legal counsel for the system, he proceeded to develop an official response to the issue that would override what the VP of Nursing had done. His position was grounded in the federal law regarding the election of workers into bargaining units, and what the Labor Relations Board stated were the fair and legal practices all employers needed to follow. He also based his position on the advice of his HR officer who understood the mood and culture of the nursing staff and was aware of why a percentage of nurses would advocate for such representation. Within two weeks of the President’s policy being implemented, noticeable changes occurred. Nurses were free to discuss the merits and disadvantages of joining a bargaining unit as along as it was did not interfere or in any reduce the level of quality in patient care. All nursing units were to hold staff meetings that allowed members of the HR team to speak to them about bargaining representation and what it would mean in terms of working conditions, salary, and fringe benefits. They were also encouraged to have a member of their staff who supported representation present that side of the question if that was deemed something the nurses on the unit wanted. The President made it clear that this level of exchange should be done to educate and inform, not to bully or coerce anyone into a position they felt was uncomfortable or not desirable. When questioned by the VP of Nursing about this position and policy, the President suggested that employees of the health system needed to be treated as adults with certain rights that were protected under the law, as well as being subject to ethical standards that support the overall vision of the organization. No vote to accept a bargaining unit ever materialized. Those individuals who were strong supporters of such representation became to realize that there was far too little backing to take a vote for representation. Within the next eight months there were little signs of any action being conducted for nursing to organize. Nursing managers and directors reported that morale had returned to normal levels, as well as productivity with no signs that any of what had happened in the past number of months negatively affected patient care.