\nWallula, WA (November 16, 2010)<\/b> \u2013 After receiving free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a group of Wallula-based Tyson Foods Inc. employees prevailed in a protracted legal battle to have a secret ballot vote to remove a local union from their workplace.\n<\/p>\n
\nLast year, Tyson (NYSE: TSN) recognized the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 1439 union as the employees\u2019 monopoly bargaining agent after a controversial \u201ccard check\u201d union organizing campaign. Union officials then gave employees only 24 hours to vote on whether or not to ratify the union\u2019s contract with the company. They also required employees to sign union dues deduction authorizations in order to vote \u2013 discouraging many employees from voting. Only 61 of the facility\u2019s 1,177 employees actually voted.\n<\/p>\n
\nIn response, a group of independent-minded employees attempted to file a decertification petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking a secret ballot election to determine the fate of their bargaining status. Tyson company officials reprimanded the employees and confiscated the employees\u2019 petition. Another group of employees then successfully filed a second petition with the NLRB to obtain a vote.\n<\/p>\n
\nThe workers relied on the Board\u2019s 2007 Dana Corporation<\/i> decision in which Foundation attorneys won new rights for employees intended to counteract the intimidation and harassment waged by aggressive union operatives that frequently occurs during union organizing campaigns, most often as a result of \u201ccard check.\u201d\n<\/p>\n
\nDana<\/i> allows workers to demand a secret ballot election to toss out union officials from their workplace within 45 days after an employer notifies employees that it has recognized a monopoly bargaining agent without a secret ballot vote. This check gives workers some ability to stop union organizers from gaining monopoly control over a workplace.\n<\/p>\n
\nUFCW union lawyers challenged the employees\u2019 petition, arguing that the union\u2019s new contract with the company barred an employee election to remove the union. However, the NLRB Regional Director in Seattle ruled last week that the employer and union officials failed to post notices as required by Dana<\/i> informing the employees of their right to a secret ballot election. He therefore upheld the validity of the employees\u2019 petition for a secret ballot vote.\n<\/p>\n
\nThe Regional Director also rejected the union\u2019s argument that, because Dana<\/i> is being challenged by union lawyers in five other cases across the country, its precedent should not be followed. The very Foundation attorneys who originally won the landmark Dana<\/i> case are providing free legal aid to employees seeking to protect their Dana rights in two of those cases before the NLRB.\n<\/p>\n
\u201cThe NLRB should allow employees the right to defend themselves from union organizing abuses including collusion between union and company officials and aggressive \u2018card check\u2019 campaigns,\u201d said Patrick Semmens, legal information director of the National Right to Work Foundation. \u201cA secret ballot election gives workers at least a fighting chance to prevent union bosses from springing their unwanted \u2018representation\u2019 on unsuspecting or vulnerable workers.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\nWallula, WA (November 16, 2010)<\/b> \u2013 After receiving free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a group of Wallula-based Tyson Foods Inc. employees prevailed in a protracted legal battle to have a secret ballot vote to remove a local union from their workplace.\n<\/p>\n
\nLast year, Tyson (NYSE: TSN) recognized the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 1439 union as the employees\u2019 monopoly bargaining agent after a controversial \u201ccard check\u201d union organizing campaign. Union officials then gave employees only 24 hours to vote on whether or not to ratify the union\u2019s contract with the company. They also required employees to sign union dues deduction authorizations in order to vote \u2013 discouraging many employees from voting. Only 61 of the facility\u2019s 1,177 employees actually voted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[888],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2916","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\n