BLOG.OLIVERBELL.COM

Chamber Urges Businesses to Appeal Labor Rulings

2013-02-04T20:49:05Z

Updated January 31, 2013, 7:26 p.m. ET

MELANIE TROTTMAN, Wall Street Journal

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is advising companies to try to reverse rulings the National Labor Relations Board made against them in the past year, following a court decision that has undermined the federal panel.

The chamber's push, outlined in a memo the business trade group began distributing to its members Wednesday, is the latest fallout from last week's federal court ruling that voided President Barack Obama's three recess appointments to the five-slot labor board.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that an NLRB decision against soda bottler and distributor Noel Canning was invalid because the three board appointees were made outside of the recess window the court believes is stipulated in the Constitution.

That invalidates the Noel Canning decision, the court found, because the board in effect lacked a quorum of at least three members when it issued the decision.

The chamber and labor lawyers this week are telling other parties that they, too, may be able to use the ruling to reverse NLRB decisions they don't like. The board supervises union elections and referees disputes in private-sector workplaces.

On Thursday, the board filed a motion asking a different court to postpone a Feb. 5 hearing in a separate case against it filed by D.R. Horton Inc., DHI +0.59%citing a need to submit a briefing addressing the implications of the canning decision. and a need to consult with the Department of Justice and other agencies. The motion said the government is trying to determine whether to appeal the recess decision directly to the Supreme Court or the full D.C. Circuit Court.

"The resolution of these issues may have consequences that reach far beyond any individual case," the filing said. Extra time could allow the board to lay out why it believes the recess appointments were valid.

In play are more than 200 labor-board rulings since President Obama made the appointments on Jan. 4, 2012. He named Democratic union lawyer Richard Griffin, Democratic Labor Department official Sharon Block and Republican NLRB lawyer Terence Flynn to the panel. Mr. Flynn stepped down from the board later in the year.

Decisions in the past 13 months included one that protected workers from being fired for complaining about workplace conditions on websites such as Facebook, FB -2.04%and another that gave greater rights to unions seeking information in employee-discipline cases.

"Many Chamber members have NLRB matters pending, impending, or recently decided. We want these members to be aware that the Noel Canning decision may have immediate effects on these matters," said Lily Fu Claffee, the chamber's general counsel, in a letter attached to the memo. Ms. Claffee said that in some cases, employers "must act fast to benefit from the decision."

"We've been hearing from members asking what this means for them," she said in an interview Thursday.

Labor board Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce has said the NLRB would keep conducting its business after the decision. He said he believes the recess appointments ultimately will be upheld.

But lawyers believe the ruling could have a ripple effect on other cases and agencies where recess appointments have been made by presidents for at least 90 years.

Nonprofit group Hispanics United of Buffalo, which is the employer that the board ruled had unlawfully fired five workers for critical Facebook postings, plans to raise the recess-appointment decision in a coming appeal, said a lawyer for the Buffalo, N.Y., group. The group already had intended to appeal on the merits of the case.

"We will be raising the issues about the recess appointments being improper," said lawyer Rafael Gomez of law firm Lo Tempio & Brown in Buffalo. He said he and his client are still deciding whether to appeal in the District of Columbia Circuit, where the Noel Canning case was decided, or in New York.

The chamber and law firms including Littler Mendelson and Jones Day have distributed or posted guidance on their websites telling clients that any decision of the board can be appealed to the D.C. Circuit.

But in its memo, the chamber said that the labor board could try to seek enforcement of a ruling in any circuit court where an alleged unfair labor practice occurred or where a company is based or does business. Because other circuits could decide to uphold the recess appointments, "it may benefit you to act as quickly as possible to ensure that you file your petition in the D.C. Circuit first," the memo said.

Employers with cases pending in other circuits should ask that court to hold the case in a state of inactivity until the recess-appointment issue is resolved nationwide, the chamber said, which many expect to happen at the Supreme Court.

Lawyers also are questioning whether some of the board's rulings made before the latest recess appointments could be challenged because former board member Craig Becker had been installed by Mr. Obama in March 2010 using a recess appointment.

Pressure is also mounting against the board in Congress. Several Republican senators introduced a bill Thursday that would prohibit the NLRB from enforcing decisions and regulations without a confirmed quorum. Another bill by Senate Republicans would prevent the recess appointees from being paid.

Unions and workers also could try to undo unfavorable board rulings against them, though such outcomes have been rarer under this administration.

Acting General Counsel releases summary of operations for FY 2012

2013-01-23T18:14:29Z

January 14, 2013

Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon has released a summary of activities for
the Fiscal Year 2012. Of special note:

* 93.9% of all initial elections were conducted within 56 days of the filing
of the petition.
* Initial elections in union representation elections were conducted in a
median of 38 days from the filing of the petition.
* A 91.0% settlement rate was achieved in the Regional Offices in
meritorious unfair labor practice cases.
* 97% of the 37 10(j) petitions litigated in federal district court resulted
in a satisfactory settlement or substantial victory.
* The Regional Offices won 90.1% of Board and Administrative Law Judge
unfair labor practice and compliance decisions in whole or in part in FY
2012.
* 94.5% of the 73 Board decisions under review by the US Courts of Appeals
were enforced or affirmed in whole or in part.
* A total of $44,316,059 was recovered on behalf of employees as backpay or
reimbursement of fees, dues, and fines. 1,241 employees were offered
reinstatement.
* The Agency exceeded two of its three ambitious overarching goals and came
close to achieving the third, closing 84.5% of all representation cases
within 100 days (target 85.2%), 72.7% of all unfair labor practice cases
within 120 days (target 72.0%), and 83.8% of all meritorious unfair labor
practice cases within 365 days (target 80.3%). The target for each 2012
overarching goal was higher than in FY 2011 and the goal for the percentage
of meritorious unfair labor practice cases closed within 365 days of the
filing of the charge has been increased for FY 2013.

In addition, the Agency's total case intake during FY 2012 was 24,275
compared to 25,004 cases in FY 2011, representing a 3% decrease in overall
intake. Unfair labor practice case intake was 21,629, a 2.5% decrease from
the previous year, and total representation case intake was 2, 646, a 6.5%
decrease from the FY 2011 total.

"I extend my sincere appreciation to all staff members for their continued
hard work and dedication to public service and for the cooperative manner in
which they have responded to the priorities in casehandling," the Acting
General Counsel said in releasing the report. "My thanks also to those who
practice before us for the cooperation and assistance extended to us in our
efforts to administer the Act effectively and efficiently."

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2012. Oliver Bell, Inc.

Department of Labor quietly announces impending release of new "persuader rules"

2013-01-23T18:13:04Z

Franczek Radelet PC Douglas A. Hass
January 2 2013

In June 2011, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) proposed new regulations
that would significantly narrow the DOL's interpretation of the
Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) that has been in force
since 1962. Dubbed the "persuader rules," the regulations address Section
203 of the LMRDA, which, among other things, requires employers to file
reports with the DOL when they hire consultants or contractors (including
attorneys) to persuade employees on the issue of unions.

The latest report

from the DOL to the federal Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
states that the DOL plans to take final action in April 2013 on the new
rules.
Section 203(c) of the LMRDA has always contained an exception to the
reporting requirement for "advice" given to an employer. For the last 50
years, the DOL interpreted the advice exception to include an attorney's
drafting of letters or speeches to employees or an attorney's legal reviews
of employer communications. Put simply, under the current interpretation, as
long as the employer has the discretion to either accept or reject oral or
written material submitted by an attorney, then the activities are not
reportable under the LMRDA. Only if an attorney (or other consultant or
contractor) met directly with employees would the activities become
reportable under the longstanding DOL interpretation.

Under the proposed regulations, the "advice exception" would be limited to
advising employers on what they may lawfully say to employees, on their
compliance with the law, or on general guidance about NLRB practice or
precedent. Reportable activities would now include any actions, conduct, or
communications on behalf of an employer that could directly or indirectly
persuade workers concerning their right to organize and bargain
collectively, regardless of whether the attorney/consultant/contractor has
direct contact with workers and regardless of whether the employer accepts
or rejects the proposals. Furthermore, the DOL's new interpretation would
specifically require reporting the preparation of persuasive scripts,
letters, videos, or other digital media for use by an employer or revisions
to an employer's documents by an attorney or consultant.

The DOL also proposed significant changes to the LM-10 and LM-20 forms, used
by the employer and consultant respectively, to disclose reportable
activity. These revised forms give examples of activities that would be
reportable "if the object thereof was, directly or indirectly, to persuade
employees," such as:

* Drafting, revising, or providing written materials for presentation,
dissemination, or distribution to employees
* Drafting, revising, or providing a speech for presentation to employees
* Drafting, revising, or providing audiovisual or multi-media presentations
for presentation, dissemination, or distribution to employees
* Drafting, revising, or providing website content for employees
* Developing or administering employee attitude surveys concerning union
awareness, sympathy, or proneness
* Training supervisors or employer representatives to conduct individual or
group employee meetings
* Coordinating or directing the activities of supervisors or employer
representatives
* Developing personnel policies or practices
* Conducting a seminar for supervisors or employer representatives

The proposed rule elicited nearly 6,000 comments, including negative
comments from the American Bar Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
and numerous other business groups.

The proposed changes drastically increase the reporting requirements for
employers and attorneys/consultants/contractors and significantly amend the
reporting forms and instructions under LMRDA Section 203. The DOL estimated
that its new rules will triple the number of reports that employers must
file and increase the reports filed by firms engaged in persuader activities
twelve-fold. By narrowing the advice exception, the DOL would broaden the
scope of conduct that could trigger potential criminal liability on the part
of employers (and others engaged in persuader activity) who fail to comply.

The newly defined standards, particularly when combined with the LMRDA's
potential criminal sanctions for willful non-reporting, could substantially
interfere with an employer's attorney-client relationship, disrupt an
employer's ability to obtain legal advice when confronted by union activity,
and have a chilling effect on employer free speech during such campaigns.

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2012. Oliver Bell, Inc.

The NLRB Finishes 2012 with a Bang and Shows No Sign of Slowing Down in 2013

2013-01-02T21:41:39Z

Authorship Credit: James W. Seegers and M.J. (Mike) Asensio, Baker Hostetler

The National Labor Relations Board (the "NLRB") released a number of
important decisions in late December 2012. The most significant of these
decisions, which seemingly signal continued activism by the NLRB, address
employee discipline and dues collection.

Under a process called "dues check-off," employers deduct union dues from
employees' wages during the payroll process and remit them directly to the
union. For over 50 years, the NLRB recognized the right of an employer to
refuse to collect dues on behalf of a union where the collective bargaining
agreement had expired. Instead, the union was required to spend its own
resources collecting dues directly from the employees. In WKYC-TV, Gannett
Co., 359 NLRB No. 30, however, the NLRB reversed long standing precedent and
determined that an employer's duty to collect union dues from its employees
continues even after the expiration of a collective bargaining agreement.
Under the NLRB's new standard, the employer must continue to collect the
union dues until either an impasse is declared or a new collective
bargaining agreement is reached. The NLRB has thus eliminated an important
financial incentive to ensure that successor labor agreements are negotiated
before they expire.

In Alan Ritchey, Inc., 359 NLRB No. 40, the NLRB determined that unionized
employers must give the union notice and an opportunity to bargain before
imposing discretionary discipline. However, the NLRB's decision was
specifically limited to the following situations:

* Bargaining is only required in discretionary disciplinary actions
involving demotions, suspensions and terminations, and not oral or written
reprimands/warnings.
* The duty to bargain only applies when the applicable collective
bargaining agreement does not establish a grievance-arbitration process.

Obviously, requiring an employer to provide notice and an opportunity to
bargain prior to implementing a disciplinary decision creates a significant
practical burden upon an employer. To this end, the NLRB specifically
provided that an employer must provide the union with, "notice and an
opportunity to bargain over the discretionary aspects of its decision before
proceeding to implement the decision. [However,] at this stage, the employer
need not bargain to agreement or impasse, if it does so afterward."

The NLRB specifically recognized in Alan Ritchey that either in "exigent
circumstances requiring immediate action" (i.e., where an employer has a
reasonable, good faith belief that an employee's continued presence on the
job presents a serious, imminent danger to the employer's business or
personnel), or where an employer has properly implemented a disciplinary
decision without first reaching agreement or impasse with the union, the
employer must continue to bargain with the union after imposing discipline.
In short, the NLRB has attempted to recognize certain situations where an
employer may proceed with discretionary discipline; however, the NLRB has
made clear that the duty to bargain will not terminate with the imposition
of discipline. It remains to be seen how the NLRB's new standard will be
applied in the workplace, but it will be sure to generate significant
litigation concerning the duty to bargain.

While not addressed by the Alan Ritchey decision, it is arguable that the
existence of a management rights clause recognizing the employer's right to
implement and enforce reasonable work rules may evidence recognition by the
union of the employer's right to implement discretionary discipline.
However, as most collective bargaining agreements contain a
grievance-arbitration process, this ruling will principally apply where the
employer and the union are attempting to bargain an initial collective
bargaining agreement. Nevertheless, the decision clearly marks a significant
expansion of the duty to bargain.

2012 has been a year filled with important game-changing decisions by the
NLRB as the agency seeks to redefine its role in the workplace of union and
non-union employees. Historically, the five-member NLRB has included three
members from the majority party and two members from the minority party. At
present, however, the NLRB has only three members, all from the majority
(i.e., the Democratic) party. Because the composition of the NLRB does not
appear to be changing anytime soon, the NLRB will proactively seek to expand
the rights of employees and organized labor. Accordingly, employers, both
unionized and non-unionized, should pay very close attention in 2013.

If you have any questions about the material presented in this Alert, please
contact James W. Seegers ( jseegers@bakerlaw.com or 407.649.4023), M.J.
(Mike) Asensio ( masensio@bakerlaw.com or 614.462.2622) or any member of the
BakerHostetler Labor Relations Team.

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2012. Oliver Bell, Inc.

NLRB ruling favors unions

2013-01-02T21:36:53Z

Sacramento Business Journal by Kathy Robertson, Senior Staff Writer

Monday, December 31, 2012, 12:22pm PST

The National Labor Relations Board overturned a 50-year-old precedent this
month with a ruling that requires employers to continue collecting union
dues after a collective bargaining agreement has expired.

The Dec. 12 ruling in a case - involving Cleveland, Ohio-based WKTV-TV -
overturns a Bethlehem Steel Co. decision in 1962 that said mandatory union
membership ends when a contract runs out.

The new ruling attempts to limit employer bargaining leverage after a
contract expires, employment lawyers say. Typically, that's a time when some
employees decide to drop union membership, said Bruce Sarchet, a shareholder
in the Sacramento office of Littler.

"This is just one of a series of decisions issued recently by the NLRB that
indicate a shift in the pendulum to a more pro-union stance," Sarchet said.

The board has given regional directors more power to enforce settlement
agreements and given the green light for workers to bargain for disciplinary
procedures after union certification but before the first contract is in
place, Sarchet said.

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2012. Oliver Bell, Inc.

Judge Upholds Organizing Rights at South Carolina (Boeing) Plant

2012-11-06T03:32:19Z

Source: goiam.org

The Boeing Company violated the National Labor Relations Act when a manager
at the plane maker's Charleston, SC assembly plant told a Boeing employee he
could not discuss union-related matters during working hours. Administrative
Law Judge William Nelson Cates ruled that Boeing could not bar employees
from talking about union matters during working time if the company allowed
discussion of non-union matters during working time.

The IAM filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge on behalf of the Boeing
employee earlier this year and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
issued its formal complaint in late June.

In his ruling issued this week, Judge Cates cited established case law in
which the NLRB found that "an employer violates the Act when employees are
forbidden to discuss unionization, but are free to discuss other subjects
unrelated to work, particularly when the prohibition is announced or
enforced only in response to specific union activity in an organizational
campaign."

The ruling coincides with increased interest in union organizing at Boeing's
South Carolina assembly plant. The IAM has recently conducted off-site
informational meetings to advise employees of their rights to organize
without harassment, discrimination or company interference.

Cates ordered Boeing to end the prohibition of discussing union-related
matters and ordered the company to notify its employees of their right to
organize.

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2012. Oliver Bell, Inc.

#Unions Recruit New Allies for Obama in Battleground States

2012-11-06T03:30:15Z

By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
use/index.html> , NYTimes

MILWAUKEE - Dressed in a ski jacket to protect her from the morning chill,
Sandy Jacobs, an occupational therapist, arrived at a fading, nearly
century-old two-family home and knocked on one of the doors.

When no one answered within a few seconds, she knocked on the second one,
and suddenly Kimberly Montgomery answered the first door. Ms. Jacobs, a
member of the American Federation of Teachers, asked, "Are you going to
vote?" Ms. Montgomery responded, "I've already voted - for Barack Obama of
course."

Suddenly the adjacent door opened - it was Ms. Montgomery's sister, Angela.
She said she had not voted yet, but she promised she would - also for Mr.
Obama.

Theirs were among the 69,176 doors that union leaders said were part of a
statewide labor canvass in Wisconsin on Saturday. In labor's last-minute
campaign efforts, canvassers in Eau Claire, Kenosha, La Crosse, Racine,
Green Bay and other communities carried the same message: Do not forget to
vote, and when you do, cast ballots for President Obama and Tammy Baldwin,
the Democratic candidate for Senate.

With labor's political influence having fallen short in the 2010 elections
and with membership declining, unions are hoping that two new strategies
will strengthen their efforts this time around. They have welcomed members
of outside groups like MoveOn.org, the N.A.A.C.P. and Planned Parenthood to
join their canvasses and phone banks. And for the first time, union members
- as a result of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision - can call and
visit not just union households, but nonunion ones too.

With just 12 percent of American workers in unions, canvassers had often
knocked on one door and then skipped 10 others before reaching another union
household. Now they can knock on every door.

"In 2000, canvassers might be able to reach only 20 doors in a two-hour
shift, but now they can knock on 40 or 45 doors," said Sasha Bruce, the
A.F.L.-C.I.O.'s national campaigns manager. "And when we get people from
other groups to join in, we're literally knocking on hundreds of thousands
more doors than we have the capacity to do on our own."

Richard Trumka, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.'s president, said on Thursday that labor's
"final four-day push" would see people knock on 5.5 million doors and make
5.2 million phone calls. He said the effort would help Mr. Obama capture
Wisconsin and Ohio.

But Sara Fagen, the White House political director under President George W.
Bush, said labor's effort would be smaller and less enthusiastic than in
2008 because so many unionized workers were feeling squeezed economically
and were disappointed that Mr. Obama did not enact measures like the "card
check" bill that would make it easier to unionize workers, which was blocked
by Republicans.

"While unions are doing a lot and spending a lot, members are hurting and a
little disillusioned, so we won't see as much on their part as in 2008," Ms.
Fagen said.

Labor leaders say union members in Wisconsin and Ohio are invigorated,
rather than disillusioned, because they are angry about laws pushed by those
states' governors to curb the bargaining rights of government employees.
Unions mounted a successful effort to repeal the Ohio law through a
referendum last November, but they failed in their bid to oust the governor
of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, in a vote in June.

"Unions have basically been in campaign mode for two years," said William
Powell Jones, a University of Wisconsin labor historian. "They're stronger
as a result."

On Saturday in Kenosha, eight MoveOn volunteers joined about 30 union
members, including a dozen teachers from the Chicago area, to knock on
doors. Ryan Canney of MoveOn expressed frustration that no one answered at
two-thirds of the homes, although he left fliers as reminders to vote.

Mr. Canney had planned to canvass again on Sunday, but not until after the
Green Bay Packers game. "The last thing you want to do is knock on someone's
door during a Packers game," he said.

Adam Ruben, MoveOn's political director, said he saw considerable benefit in
teaming up his group's seven million members with the A.F.L.-C.I.O.'s more
than 10 million members and retirees. MoveOn has repeatedly sent e-mails
urging members to report to union halls nearby for canvasses.

"They have the physical infrastructure you need, the expertise, the
resources," Mr. Ruben said. "We bring online organizing expertise."

Phil Neuenfeldt, the president of the Wisconsin A.F.L.-C.I.O., said he was
delighted to see union halls become centers of political activity for union
and nonunion members.

"It's about building a movement," he said. "It's not about just one win or
loss. It's about the long haul."

The Service Employees International Union has helped establish a
community-labor coalition called Wisconsin Jobs Now, which has pushed to
raise the minimum wage and stop cuts to Medicaid
/medicaid/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> . The group has enlisted 130
block captains, many in Milwaukee's poorest neighborhoods, to distribute
campaign literature and drive hundreds of residents to the polls.

Greg Lewis, a minister at St. Gabriel's Church of God and Christ, has
recruited 207 pastors to join the coalition's get-out-the-vote effort.

"We feel it's important to work with Wisconsin Jobs Now to help get people
out of their doldrums and get them excited about the campaign," he said.

Scott Furlong, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin,
Green Bay, said labor's new cooperation with other groups might be an
acknowledgment of weakness.

"It might be a realization," he said, "that they're not powerful enough to
do things on their own anymore."

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2012. Oliver Bell, Inc.

Recent #NLRB Petitions and #ULP Charges for your information.

2012-10-24T18:12:47Z

Q's: please contact your Oliver Bell, Inc. consultant or
email info@oliverbell.com

02-RD-091775	3815 9th Avenue Meat & Produce Corporation
01-RC-091741	Brown University
15-RC-091751	Comcast Dothan, Al
13-RC-091734	Cranemasters, Inc.
13-RC-091789	Holiday Inn Chicago O'Hare
08-RC-091744	Kenyon College
01-RC-091729	New England Ambulance, Inc.
19-RD-091764	Rams Specialized Security Service, Inc.
01-RC-091771	Redi-Mix
01-RC-091769	Redi-Mix
13-RD-091766	Sable Kitchen & Bar
29-RC-091728	Transcare
04-RC-091755	Univar USA
10-RC-091714	Kimberly Clark

ULP Charges

AA Transportation	01-CA-091772	8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
United States Postal Service	01-CA-091816
JJ Thai Kitchen Corp. D/b/a Thai 51	02-CA-091737	8(a)(1) Coercive Statements (threats, Promises Of Benefits, Etc.) 8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (retaliation, Discharge, Discipline) 8(a)(1) Coercive Actions (surveillance, Etc)
PLS III, Llc D/b/a Rainbow Transportation	03-CA-091709	8(a)(5) Refusal To Bargain/bad Faith Bargaining (incl'g Surface Bargaining/direct Dealing) 8(a)(5) Repudiation/modification Of Contract [sec 8(d)/unilateral Changes]
Super Media, Inc.	03-CA-091768	8(a)(5) Repudiation/modification Of Contract [sec 8(d)/unilateral Changes]
ABF Freight Systems	04-CA-091659	8(a)(5) Refusal To Furnish Information
Lincoln Technical Institute	04-CA-091704	8(a)(3) Discipline
FirstEnergy Corporation	06-CA-091777	8(a)(5) Repudiation/modification Of Contract [sec 8(d)/unilateral Changes]
K-Mart	06-CA-091823
Mercy Monroe Hospital	07-CA-091796
Continental Structural Plastics Of Ohio, Llc	08-CA-091719	8(a)(3) Discipline 8(a)(5) Refusal To Furnish Information 8(a)(5) Repudiation/modification Of Contract [sec 8(d)/unilateral Changes]
Opportunity Homes, Inc.	08-CA-091721	8(a)(3) Changes In Terms And Conditions Of Employment
Sears Holdings Corporation	08-CA-091724	8(a)(5) Refusal To Furnish Information 8(a)(5) Repudiation/modification Of Contract [sec 8(d)/unilateral Changes]
United States Postal Service	09-CA-091792
E.I. Dupont Denemours & Co. - Louisville Works	09-CA-091793
Frontier Communications Corp.	09-CA-091805
Cabell Huntington Hospital, Inc	09-CA-091837
Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.	10-CA-091765	8(a)(5) Refusal To Bargain/bad Faith Bargaining (incl'g Surface Bargaining/direct Dealing)
Early Childhood Development Corporation, Llc	10-CA-091813
Lake Charles Care Center	15-CA-091762	8(a)(1) Discharge Of Supervisor (parker-robb Chevrolet)
Open Cities Health Center	18-CA-091713	8(a)(5) Refusal To Bargain/bad Faith Bargaining (incl'g Surface Bargaining/direct Dealing) 8(a)(5) Repudiation/modification Of Contract[sec 8(d)/unilateral Changes] 8(a)(5) Refusal To Furnish Information 8(a)(3) Changes In Terms And Conditions Of Employment
United States Postal Service	19-CA-091831
Pace Solano	20-CA-091743	■8(a)(3) Changes in Terms and Conditions of Employment
Richmond District Neighborhood Center	20-CA-091748	■8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (Retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
Maui Publishing Company, Ltd.	20-CA-091756	■8(a)(5) Repudiation/Modification of Contract [Sec 8(d)/Unilateral Changes
United States Postal Service	20-CA-091757	■8(a)(5) Refusal to Furnish Information
United States Postal Service	20-CA-091759	■8(a)(3) Discipline
Moana Surfrider, A Westin Resort & Spa	20-CA-091782	8(a)(5) Refusal To Bargain/bad Faith Bargaining (incl'g Surface Bargaining/direct Dealing)
United States Postal Service	20-CA-091784	■8(a)(5) Refusal to Furnish Information
Englewood Hospital and Medical Center	22-CA-091739
Benjamin H. Realty Corp.	22-CA-091750	■8(a)(1) Coercive Statements (Threats, Promises of Benefits, etc.) ■8(a)(3) Changes in Terms and Conditions of Employment
Hummel Croton	22-CA-091753	■8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (Retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
FDR Services Corp of New Jersey	22-CA-091774	■8(a)(3) Discharge (Including Layoff and Refusal to Hire (not salting))
Intertek	22-CA-091779	■8(a)(3) Discipline ■8(a)(3) Discharge (Including Layoff and Refusal to Hire (not salting))
Hummel Croton , Inc.	22-CA-091795
Monmouth Ocean Hospital Service Corp. d/ba MONOC	22-CA-091797
Hospital Damas	24-CA-091747
Horizon Lines	24-CA-091808
Formaloy Corp.	25-CA-091742	8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
Keokuk Steel Castings, Inc.	25-CA-091746	8(a)(1) Coercive Actions (surveillance, Etc)
Lifehouse The Atrium Memory Care	25-CA-091781	8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
Century Link Communications	27-CA-091785	8(a)(1) Weingarten
Akal Security, Inc.	27-CA-091812
Veolia Transportation Las Vegas	28-CA-091791	8(a)(5) Refusal To Bargain/bad Faith Bargaining (incl'g Surface Bargaining/direct Dealing)
Western Refining Inc., And It's Subsidiary Western Refining Wholesale, Inc.	28-CA-091821
Remington Hotels D/b/a Hyatt Regency Long Island And Remington Lodging & Hospitality, Llc	29-CA-091763	8(a)(3) Discharge (including Layoff And Refusal To Hire (not Salting))
Calhoun Foods, Llc D/b/a Key Food	29-CA-091776	■8(a)(5) Refusal to Bargain/Bad Faith Bargaining (incl'g surface bargaining/direct dealing)
New York Methodist Hospital	29-CA-091809
United Parcel Service	29-CA-091815
United Parcel Service	29-CA-091817
Dignity Health Care dba Community Hospital of San Bernardino	31-CA-091787	8(a)(3) Discipline 8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
Brisam (de) Lax LLC, MCSAM Hotel LLC, The Packard Companies D/b/a Holiday Inn LAX Hotel	31-CA-091788	8(a)(3) Discharge (including Layoff And Refusal To Hire (not Salting)) 8(a)(1) Coercive Statements (threats, Promises Of Benefits, Etc.) 8(a)(3) Discipline 8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
Menefee & Sons Ii	32-CA-091783	8(a)(1) Concerted Activities (retaliation, Discharge, Discipline)
Exotic Engine	32-CA-091828
Clinica De Salud Del Valle De Salinas	32-CA-091832
Clinica De Salud Del Valle De Salinas	32-CA-091836
Sumitomo Bakelite North America	34-CA-091802

Huff Post shows #union bias asking disgruntled employees to slam #walmart.

2012-10-24T17:33:38Z

Walmart Strike Memo Reveals Confidential Management Plans

Posted: 10/13/2012 2:18 pm Updated: 10/16/2012 8:12 pm

Walmart launched a large-scale response this week to a series of
unprecedented labor strikes, according to a confidential document obtained
by The Huffington Post.

The seven-page internal memo
, issued Oct. 8, is
intended for salaried employees only, and contains instructions on how to
respond to strikes by hourly workers that spread to 28 Walmart stores in 12
cities earlier this week. The strikes were the first by Walmart retail
employees in the company's 50-year history.

The memo makes clear that Walmart, the world's largest private employer,
views the labor protests as a serious attack, a message that runs contrary
to the company's public comments
com/2012/10/09/walmart-strike-dallas-arkansas-los-angeles-workers_n_1951867.
html?utm_hp_ref=business%E2%80%9D> that the strikes are mere "publicity
stunts," as Walmart's vice president of communications David Tovar told The
Huffington Post Tuesday.

"As you know," the memo opens, "activists or union organizers have been
trying for years to stop our Company's growth and to damage our relationship
with our customers and members. One of the activists' or union organizers'
tactics is to try to disrupt the business by urging our associates to
participate in a walkout or other form of work stoppage."

The majority of the memo is aimed at instructing managers not to violate
workers' legal right to engage in concerted activity, or non-union labor
organizing. Managers are directed not to "discipline" employees who engage
in walkouts, sit-ins or sick-outs.

Legal experts said the confidential memo shows an unprecedented level of
caution from a company that has taken harsh stances towards employee
attempts to organize in the past.

"Walmart probably has in mind that the Obama NLRB [National Labor Relations
Board] often sides with unions over management," said Lance Compa, a labor
law professor at Cornell University's School of Industrial Relations in
Ithaca, N.Y. "So they're being extremely cautious."

The memo is peppered with Walmart management jargon, offering a window into
the secretive corporate culture built by founder Sam Walton. Managers are
reminded over and over of the acronym TIPS (Threaten Intimidate Promise Spy)
when dealing with potential labor organizing by hourly-wage "associates."
The widely used human resources term serves to remind managers that they
cannot, by law, threaten or intimidate workers who organize, promise them
benefits if they stop organizing, or spy on their activities.

What managers can legally do, however, is what Walmart calls FOE -- offer
workers Facts, Opinions, and Personal Experiences about labor organizing.
Walmart offers a sample opinion that says, "I don't think a walkout is a
good way to resolve problems or issues." According to Compa, this is a
boilerplate tactic for companies looking to discourage unionizing without
breaking the law.

The historic retail worker strikes began last Friday in Los Angeles, when
60-some people walked off work
-first-ever_n_1940710.html> , and they quickly spread across the country.
Earlier in September, workers at warehouses
a_n_1880892.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular> owned by Walmart in Illinois and
California also went on strike.

Striking workers are demanding that Walmart end retaliatory practices
against employees who attempt to organize by Nov. 23, Black Friday. If not,
they will strike again on the biggest shopping day of the year, according to
Colby Harris
e_n_1954782.html?utm_hp_ref=business> , a Walmart worker from Dallas, who
participated in Tuesday's strike.

Walmart spokesman Dan Fogleman said the strikes were largely publicity
stunts. "We've seen the unions hold these made for TV events outside our
stores for about ten years now," he told HuffPost, "and they want the
publicity to help further their political and financial agendas. There is a
very small number of associates raising these concerns, and they don't
represent the views of the vast majority of our 1.3 million associates."

According to Compa, the memo reflects Walmart's concern over the 20-some
charges of unfair labor practices that Walmart workers filed with the
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) over the past 8 weeks in concurrence
with the strikes.

The charges include dozens of allegations from employees who claim they were
subjected to harassment, cut hours and other disciplinary actions when
Walmart higher-ups learned that they supported OUR Walmart, the United Food
and Commercial Workers-backed worker group that organized the recent
strikes. If the NLRB sides with the workers, Walmart may eventually be
forced to pay a huge settlement in back pay, the specific amount of which
would vary for each individual case.

Fogleman said the company has "very strict policies against retaliation. If
an associate feels that they have been retaliated against, we want to know
that. That allows us the opportunity to look into it and take appropriate
action."

Politics may also play a role in the company's newfound caution. Top
positions at the NLRB are appointed by the president, and Democrats have
traditionally been more sympathetic to labor organizers.

Notably, the leaked memo lacks many of Walmart's famously tough labor
policies.

In the past, internal Walmart documents instructed managers to remind
employees that they could be permanently replaced if they went on strike, as
well as provided talking points on the false guarantees unions make to
workers, according to a 2007 report by Human Rights Watch that examined 292
NLRB charges against Walmart. The new document bears no mention of replacing
employees.

At one point, Walmart is even more cautious than the law requires. The
document does not instruct managers to evict employees conducting a sit-in
on company property, as is within their legal right, according to Compa, who
also serves as a consultant to Human Rights Watch.

Still, a few of the strategies that made Walmart famous as a union-buster
rear their heads in the document. Tacked onto the end of the memo is a
definition of the term, "Coaching By Walking Around" (CBWA), or "when
managers walk through their facility or department everyday just to visit
with associates," as Walmart explains it. While it may sound benign, the
verb "to coach" in Walmart lexicon also means to discipline employees.
According to workers interviewed by Human Rights Watch, Walmart managers
have used CBWA as a surveillance tactic to monitor and deter labor
organizers .

Have you worked at Walmart? The Huffington Post wants to know about your
experience. Email us .
Information will remain confidential.

Fogleman, the Walmart spokesman, defended the CBWA, saying that management
uses it as a tool to "remain engaged with everyone working for them and with
environment. It helps foster the channels of open dialogue that set us apart
as an employer."

It remains to be seen whether the new directives will have a long-term
impact on Walmart managers. "I think it's one thing to get a piece of paper,
but in practice that's not what people have experienced in these stores,"
said Sarita Gupta, executive director of Jobs with Justice, a nonprofit
workers rights group. Gupta cautions that one document is unlikely to alter
five decades of anti-union corporate culture. "What I worry about is that
our experience with Walmart management is they say they'll respect workers,
and then their actions tell a different story."

Walmart also could have ulterior motives for considering workers rights,
such as covering itself in upcoming Unfair Labor Practice proceedings.
"Walmart could say, in effect, 'Look, it says right here, we told our
supervisors 'don't retaliate' -- so we must be innocent," said Compa, the
law professor. Compa noted that this is a possible motivation for Walmart to
have put such "extremely circumspect" manager instructions down on paper at
a time like this.

For Dan Schlademan, director of the UFCW's Making Change at Walmart
campaign, the motives of the memo are less important than its overall effect
on workers. "I've been doing this work for 20 years, and I've never seen a
document like this."

"What's important about this piece of paper is that it solidifies what
people saw for the first time during the strikes, which is that Walmart
employees were able to walk out in protest, and the next day were able to
return to work. For many of them, that was amazing to see."

SEE THE WALMART DOCUMENT HERE.

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2012. Oliver Bell, Inc.