LAS VEGAS, NV \u2013 A large
\nmajority of the workers at Red Rock
\nCasino in Las Vegas, Nevada voted
\n\u201cno\u201d to unionization, but a federal
\ndistrict court judge ordered their
\nemployer to bargain with union
\nofficials anyway. Casino officials
\nappealed, and Red Rock employee
\nRaynell Teske supported their efforts
\nto overturn the judge\u2019s coercive order
\nthat overrides the choice workers
\nmade at the ballot box.
\nWith free Foundation legal aid,
\nTeske filed a brief arguing that the
\ndistrict judge had no reason to
\nimpose a union onto workers who
\nhad already soundly voted to reject
\nit. A Ninth Circuit panel denied the
\ninitial appeal, but issued an unusual
\nconcurring opinion in which all
\nthree judges said they disagreed with
\nthat outcome, but were bound by
\nNinth Circuit precedent to uphold
\nthe district judge\u2019s order.
\nBinding precedent can only be
\noverturned through an en banc
\nhearing before a larger Ninth Circuit
\npanel. Red Rock lawyers filed for an
\nen banc rehearing of their appeal.The
\ncourt then ordered National Labor
\nRelations Board (NLRB) lawyers
\ndefending the order to respond,
\nanother signal the judges may be
\nwilling to overturn this ridiculous
\nprecedent and rule in the workers\u2019
\nfavor. Teske filed a second amicus
\nbrief, urging the court to hear the
\ncase en banc.
\nJudge Overrides Workers\u2019
\nVote Against Union
\n\u2018Representation\u2019
\nThe situation at Red Rock began in
\nDecember 2019, when the NLRB held
\na secret-ballot election on whether
\nto unionize the Casino\u2019s workers.
\nEmployees rejected union officials\u2019
\neffort to become their monopoly
\nbargaining \u201crepresentatives\u201d in an
\nNLRB-supervised vote by a nearly
\n100-vote margin. Despite that
\noutcome, NLRB Region 28 Director
\nCornele Overstreet sought a federal
\ncourt injunction imposing the union
\nover the workers\u2019 objections.
\nOn July 20, 2021, District Judge
\nGloria Navarro agreed with the
\nNLRB Director\u2019s request, and
\nordered Red Rock to bargain with
\nunion officials despite the employees\u2019
\nvote against unionization. The judge
\nsaid the order was justified because
\nunion officials claimed that, before
\nthe vote, a majority of workers had
\nsigned union authorization cards.
\nTeske\u2019s amicus briefs argue those
\n\u201cCard Check\u201d signatures don\u2019t prove
\nthat union officials ever had majority
\nsupport. She contends the level of
\nunion support was tested fairly by
\nthe secret-ballot election, in which
\nworkers voted 627-534 against
\nunionization.
\nHer briefs point out that the
\nNLRB and federal courts have long
\nrecognized that secret ballots are a
\nmore reliable way of gauging worker
\nsupport for a union, because workers
\nare often pressured, harassed, or
\nmisled by union organizers into
\nsigning cards.
\nUnions officials know that Card
\nCheck signatures do not indicate
\nsolid worker support. The AFL-CIO
\nadmitted in its internal organizing
\nhandbook that it needed at least 75%
\nCard Check support before having
\neven a 50-50 chance of winning a
\nsecret-ballot election. Union bosses
\nprefer Card Check unionization
\nbecause they can more easily take
\ncontrol of workplaces where they
\nlack popular support, and partisan
\nNLRB appointees now are working
\nto grant their wish.
\nPartisan NLRB Pushes
\nUnreliable \u2018Card Check\u2019
\nPast legislative attempts to enact
\nCard Check unionization, including
\nthe so-called \u201cPRO Act,\u201d pending
\nin the U.S. Senate right now, faced
\nbipartisan opposition. However,
\nNLRB General Counsel Jennifer
\nAbruzzo, a former high-ranking
\nunion lawyer, believes she can
\nimplement Card Check without
\ncongressional approval. Abruzzo has
\nexpressed interest in resurrecting
\na decades-old NLRB doctrine that
\nallows unions to sue employers to
\ntry to force them to automatically
\nbargain whenever the union
\npossesses a pile of untested union
\ncards.
\n\u201cThere is no reason why district
\ncourt judges or NLRB bureaucrats
\nshould be able to override workers\u2019
\nchoice at the ballot box,\u201d said
\nNational Right to Work Foundation
\nVice President Patrick Semmens. \u201cA
\nfavorable ruling for Raynell Teske
\nand her colleagues could provide
\nlegal ammunition for future workers
\nif the NLRB tries to force them to
\naccept union officials for whom they
\nnever even had a chance to vote.\u201d
\n<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"