Union-busting 101

Cypress

Well-known member
Labor law enforcment and penalities are so weak, it actually pays for the comapany to ignore or violate the law:


Wal-Mart breaks the law, gets punished, wins anyway

Retailer fends off unions, thanks to weak federal watchdogs with few teeth

By Michael J. Mishak and David McGrath Schwartz
Las Vegas Sun

Here is how Wal-Mart, at a cost of a couple of thousand dollars, illegally beat back an attempt to unionize its stores in Nevada:

Seven years ago, as Wal-Mart corporate executives proclaimed Nevada ground zero in a n attempt to battle unionizing the giant retailer, three workers at Wal-Mart stores in Southern Nevada took the first steps toward organizing. Avis Hammond, Norine Sorensen and Diana Griego talked to fellow employees about the union and passed out fliers in front of stores, activities clearly allowed under federal labor laws.

Management stepped in. The three employees were told to stop. They were questioned, threatened and insulted, according to later findings by the government. Wal-Mart stripped one worker of his union fliers and denied another a promotion.

The union seeking to represent workers asked for help from the National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency charged with enforcing labor law. The workers wanted Wal-Mart to act within the law so they could continue to try to organize.

That was in 2000.

Last month - seven years, two months and seven days after the first charge was filed - the NLRB issued its ruling: Wal-Mart acted illegally.

The punishment: The retailer must pay lost wages to one of the employees, which apparently comes to a few thousand dollars. It also must post notices in its three stores disclosing its federal labor law violations.

The outcome: The union has long since given up trying to organize from within the stores. The three workers quit the company.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/lv-other/2007/sep/14/566679994.html
 
'Wal-Mart acted illegally'

OMGZ THIS IS SO SURPRISNG AND DIFFICULT AN ISSUE WE NEED SEVEN FUCKING YEARS TO COME TO A CONCLUSION HOW DARE YOU CRITIZSCIXE US!?
 
Yeah, that's why I posted this in the other thread:

The consequences aren't really all that harsh. At all. From an economic perspective a company would most time be well-advised to fire union organizers in an attempt to scuttle an organization drive. The only consequences are awarding back pay to the fired employee and possibly front pay, which would be offset by any earnings the employee made in the time between the firing and the conclusion of the case, which could take years. And that's only if the employee pursues it.

Comparing that to the prospect of dealing with a union, many companies choose the former.

It makes financial sense for union organizers to be fired.
 
Yep the infes and penalties are such that it is profitable for comapnies to break the law in many areas. If you do something illegal and make 1 mill profit a 10k fine is nothing.
 
Back
Top