Line Clearance Workers Choose IBEW
Posted By James Parks On October 6, 2009 @ 3:11 pm In Organizing & Bargaining
The workers at Guzman Garden Line Clearance voted to join [1] Electrical Workers (IBEW) [2] Local 47 last month after their bosses reneged on promises to make changes and give workers a voice.
Guzman Gardens is a line clearance contractor that works on Los Angeles Department of Water and Power property. This summer, Guzman workers contacted Local 47 and inquired about joining the union and 22 of the 24 workers signed cards seeking representation by the union.
But the company demanded a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)-supervised election and hired a union-busting firm to try and persuade the workers to reject the union. Had the [3] Employee Free Choice Act been in effect, the workers would have had a union immediately because a union would be recognized through the cards they signed (majority verification or “card-check”). The Employee Free Choice Act would give workers the option of choosing whether to join a union through the labor board process or via majority verification.
The day before the first election, the company’s owner held a captive audience meeting with all his employees. Workers said he apologized to the workforce and promised to listen to their concerns and asked them for one more chance.
The workers, out of a sense of loyalty to the owner, and trusting he would keep his promises, decided to give him one more chance and voted against union representation.
But within days, the owner reneged on his promised changes. Local 47 filed unfair labor practice charges against the company with the NLRB, which ordered a new election. This time the workers voted overwhelmingly for IBEW.
Guzman is an example of a small employer hiring a union-buster and pulling out all stops, including engaging in deliberate deceit, in order to foil its workers’ desire to form a union. Large employers routinely deploy even greater resources and more insidious strategies against workers and unions in order to maintain unimpeded control over their workers’ livelihoods. The Employee Free Choice Act is absolutely necessary to level the playing field and deter these abuses.
Guzman Gardens is a line clearance contractor that works on Los Angeles Department of Water and Power property. This summer, Guzman workers contacted Local 47 and inquired about joining the union and 22 of the 24 workers signed cards seeking representation by the union.
But the company demanded a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)-supervised election and hired a union-busting firm to try and persuade the workers to reject the union. Had the [3] Employee Free Choice Act been in effect, the workers would have had a union immediately because a union would be recognized through the cards they signed (majority verification or “card-check”). The Employee Free Choice Act would give workers the option of choosing whether to join a union through the labor board process or via majority verification.
The day before the first election, the company’s owner held a captive audience meeting with all his employees. Workers said he apologized to the workforce and promised to listen to their concerns and asked them for one more chance.
The workers, out of a sense of loyalty to the owner, and trusting he would keep his promises, decided to give him one more chance and voted against union representation.
But within days, the owner reneged on his promised changes. Local 47 filed unfair labor practice charges against the company with the NLRB, which ordered a new election. This time the workers voted overwhelmingly for IBEW.
Guzman is an example of a small employer hiring a union-buster and pulling out all stops, including engaging in deliberate deceit, in order to foil its workers’ desire to form a union. Large employers routinely deploy even greater resources and more insidious strategies against workers and unions in order to maintain unimpeded control over their workers’ livelihoods. The Employee Free Choice Act is absolutely necessary to level the playing field and deter these abuses.
Article printed from AFL-CIO NOW BLOG: http://blog.aflcio.org
No comments:
Post a Comment