NLRB ISSUES COMPLAINT AGAINST WALMART REGARDING WORKER PROTESTERS

FROM:  NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 

Office of Public Affairs 202-273-1991 publicinfo@nlrb.gov www.nlrb.gov NLRB Office of the General Counsel Issues Complaint against Walmart January 15, 2014 The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Office of the General Counsel has issued a consolidated complaint against Walmart alleging that the company violated the rights of its employees as a result of activities surrounding employee protests in 14 states. The Office of the General Counsel informed Walmart that complaints were authorized in November of 2013, but withheld issuing the complaints to allow time for settlement discussions. The discussions have not been successful and a consolidated complaint has issued regarding some of the alleged violations of federal law. More than 60 Walmart supervisors and one corporate officer are named in the complaint. Cases were consolidated to avoid unnecessary costs or delay. Walmart must respond to the complaint by January 28, 2014. No hearing date has been set. The Office of General Counsel has authorized or issued complaints in other Walmart cases and additional charges remain under investigation.

The National Labor Relations Act guarantees the right of private sector employees to act together to try to improve their wages and working conditions with or without a union. The consolidated complaint involves more than 60 employees, 19 of whom were discharged allegedly as a result of their participation in activities protected by the National Labor Relations Act. The Office of the General Counsel alleges that Walmart violated the Act when: During two national television news broadcasts and in statements to employees at Walmart stores in California and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened employees with reprisal if they engaged in strikes and protests; At stores in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Washington, Walmart unlawfully threatened, disciplined, and/or terminated employees for having engaged in legally protected strikes and protests; At stores in California, Florida, Missouri and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened, surveilled, disciplined, and/or terminated employees in anticipation of or in response to employees’ other protected concerted activities. #

THIS IS NATIONAL LABOR RIGHTS WEEK

FROM:  U.S. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
NLRB and National Labor Rights Week: Working to Fulfill the Promise of the National Labor Relations Act

August 25 through August 31 is National Labor Rights Week.  Throughout the country, staff members working in regional offices of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are meeting with immigrant workers, community groups, employees and employers to discuss the rights guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act.

“We are placing a particular emphasis on educating Mexican workers employed in the United States by partnering with Mexican consulates in many communities,” said NLRB Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce.  “Along with other federal labor agencies, including the Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, we are participating in events designed to ensure that Mexican employers and workers in the United States understand their rights and obligations under American law.”

“Since its passage in 1935, the National Labor Relations Act has promised generations of workers the right to join together, with or without a union, to seek improvements and a voice in their working lives,” notes Acting NLRB General Counsel Lafe Solomon.  “But that promise can only be fulfilled if individuals understand and are able to exercise their rights under the law.”

Among the events taking place this week:

In California, NLRB Regional Directors will attend the Los Angeles and San Francisco Mexican Consulates’ opening celebration for Labor Rights Week, representatives will hold briefings on the NLRB for the Los Angeles consulate’s professional staff, and attorneys will participate in a telethon designed to provide callers with information on their rights and the agencies best suited for assisting them; in San Francisco, staff will participate in outreach programs hosted by the consulate.

In Illinois,  the Regional Director signed a Local Agreement with the Consul General of Mexico in Chicago as part of the opening ceremonies for Labor Rights Week, while Regional staff will participate in numerous events throughout the week at the consulate and throughout the community;

In New Jersey, the Regional office is participating in the Mexican Consulate’s New Brunswick Labor Week events, scheduled for August 27 and 29;

In Raleigh, North Carolina, attorneys from the Regional office will participate in a presentation at the Mexican Consulate, including an overview of the rights of employers and employees under the NLRA;

In Oregon, NLRB staff will pass out literature and meet with the public at booths in The Dalles, Portland and Woodburn;

In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, attorneys from the Regional office will participate in a briefing sponsored by the Mexican Consulate, highlighting the work of the NLRB and responding to questions;

In Texas, Regional staff are participating in events planned in Dallas, Houston and San Antonio;

In Washington State, representatives from the NLRB Seattle office will discuss employee and employer rights and obligations at a booth located in Centro de la Raza.

“These activities around the country build on the letter of agreement I signed last month with Mexican Ambassador Eduardo Medina-Mora Icaza,” Acting General Counsel Solomon said.  “We are committed to working together to provide outreach, education, and training on the rights of workers under the National Labor Relations Act.”

“All of this week’s activities will help to guarantee the right of workers to engage in protected-concerted activity to improve their working conditions without fear of discrimination, harassment or retaliation,” Chairman Pearce said.

COURT ENFORCES NLRB ORDERS AGAINST RELCO LOCOMOTIVES, INC., REGARDING TERMINATED EMPLOYEES

FROM:  U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT 
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Enforces NLRB Orders Against RELCO Locomotives, Inc.

In a decision issued on August 20, 2013, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals enforced two decisions and orders issued by the National Labor Relations Board against Relco, Locomotives, Inc.  In enforcing the Board’s Orders, the Court agreed that Relco illegally terminated a total of eight employees in violation of the National Labor Relations Act.

Relco repairs and rebuilds locomotives at its facility in Albia, Iowa.  In 2009, employees in the Albia facility sought union representation.  Relco suddenly discharged the leading employee Union adherents.  In addition, in 2010, Relco terminated two other employees who were involved in protests that Relco was overcharging employees to clean their uniforms.  After an investigation, Region 18 of the Board, located in Minneapolis, issued a complaint alleging the four terminations violated the National Labor Relations Act.  The legality of the terminations was litigated before an administrative law judge on September 14 through 16, 2010.

In 2011, employees again sought union representation.  In March 2011, Relco terminated two additional employees who not only were involved in the renewed union organizing, but who also testified in support of the discharged employees in the September 2010 NLRB proceeding.  Around the same time, Relco terminated another two employees who expressed concerns about job security when there were rumors in the plant that the company had terminated another employee.  Following a second investigation, Region 18 issued a second complaint against Relco alleging that the four additional terminations also violated the Act.  The legality of these four terminations was litigated before a different administrative law judge than the first complaint, on August 9 and 10, 2011.

In enforcing the Board Orders, the Eighth Circuit stated that there was substantial evidence that Relco terminated two employees in 2009 because of their union support; that Relco terminated two other employees in 2010 because of their protests involving overcharging for cleaning work uniforms; that Relco terminated two employees in 2011 because of their testimony before the NLRB in the case involving the 2009 terminations; and that two additional employees were illegally terminated because of their discussions and concerns about the rumored termination of another employee.  In doing so, the Court noted that the National Labor Relations Act “provides protections to workers who seek to form a union or otherwise engage in concerted labor activities.”

Finally, the Court (Circuit Judge Smith dissenting) found that Relco waived its right to challenge the Board’s decision on the basis that the Board panel deciding the cases was not constitutionally appointed.

NLRB SEEKS ABOUT $2.6 MILLION FOR STAGEHANDS FROM PERFORMING ARTS CENTER

FROM: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The National Labor Relations Board has issued a second complaint against the Raymond F. Kravis Center for the Performing Arts in West Palm Beach alleging violations of federal labor law in a dispute that dates back more than a decade.

NLRB attorneys also on Monday issued a Compliance Specification that calculates the Center owes about $2.6 million in back pay and benefit contributions, plus interest that continues to accrue, to several hundred members of the stagehands’ union who were unlawfully denied employment.

The Board ruled in September 2007 that the theatrical venue violated federal labor law by failing to bargain to impasse with its union, IATSE, by unilaterally changing wages and conditions of employment, and by refusing to use the union’s hiring hall in more than 700 productions staged since charges were filed in 2001. The Board’s order was enforced by the DC Circuit Court in 2008.

The Compliance Specification (in case 06-CA-036484) calculates the amount that carpenters, electricians, and other skilled laborers would have earned had the Center used the hiring hall, as required by a collective bargaining agreement between the employer and union.

The agreement had expired and the parties were bargaining for a renewal when the Center declared negotiations had reached impasse, fired six union employees and declared it would hire a set of non-union core employees to perform work previously performed by union members.

In its 2007 decision, the Board ordered the Center to offer reinstatement to the fired workers and return to bargaining for a new contract. Negotiations did resume, but the Center again declared impasse in 2011 and imposed essentially the same conditions as it had previously.

The complaint issued this week by the NLRB Regional Office in Tampa (case 12-CA-027075) alleges that in the fall of 2010, the Center declared impasse even though it had not bargained in good faith to impasse. The complaint also alleges that the Center unlawfully fired three employees and unlawfully insisted on employing a core crew rather than filling stagehand jobs through the hiring hall.

A hearing on the complaint and the compliance specification is scheduled to be held before an NLRB administrative law judge on October 29, 2012, in West Palm Beach.

NLRB JUDGE FINDS JIMMY JOHNS FRANCHISEE ILLEGALLY FIRED EMPLOYEES

FROM:  U.S. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
NLRB judge finds Jimmy Johns franchisee in Minnesota illegally fired employees for protected activity
Administrative Law Judge Arthur Amchan has found that a franchisee of the Jimmy Johns sandwich chain unlawfully discharged six employees after they staged a public campaign complaining of the company’s employee sick leave policy.

In his April 20 decision, Judge Amchan also found that Miklin Enterprises, Inc., a franchisee that operates 10 sandwich shops in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, unlawfully issued written warnings to three employees who took part in the campaign. His decision orders the employer to offer reinstatement to those discharged and rescind the written warnings, and to post notices at all of its shops.

Charges were filed by the Industrial Workers of the World on behalf of the workers, who have also been involved in a campaign to unionize the shops. The NLRB Regional Office in Minneapolis conducted an election in October, 2010, and the union lost by two votes. However, after objections were filed by the union alleging the company engaged in unfair labor practices during the election, the employer and union entered into a settlement in which a rerun election could be held within a year and a half.

In March, 2011, employees asked Milkin Enterprises to provide paid sick leave and to change a policy that requires the employees to find replacements when they are ill and unable to work. After the employer declined, employees posted notices near the 10 shops warning customers that their sandwiches could be made by ill employees. Many or all of these notices were immediately removed by the franchisee. Two days later, six employees involved in the postings were fired and three others received written warnings.
In his decision, Judge Amchan found that the employees’ activity was protected because it was part of an ongoing labor dispute, and that the language and images used did not cause the employees to lose their protection. In addition to ordering the employer to offer reinstatement, the judge also ordered that the employees receive full backpay for any loss of earnings and other benefits.

U.S. DC CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS BLOCKS REQUIRED POSTING OF EMPLOYEE RIGHTS

FROM:  NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
In light of conflicting decisions at the district court level, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals has temporarily enjoined the NLRB’s rule requiring the posting of employee rights, which had been scheduled to take effect on April 30, 2012.

In view of the DC Circuit's order, and in light of the strong interest in the uniform implementation and administration of agency rules, regional offices will not implement the rule pending the resolution of the issues before the court.

In March, the D.C. District Court found that the agency had the authority to issue the rule. The NLRB supports that decision, but plans to appeal a separate part that raised questions about enforcement mechanisms. The agency disagrees with and will appeal last week’s decision by the South Carolina District Court, which found the NLRB lacked authority to promulgate the rule.

Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce said of the recent decisions, “We continue to believe that requiring employers to post this notice is well within the Board’s authority, and that it provides a genuine service to employees who may not otherwise know their rights under our law.”