Jerry’s Budget Hurts His Own Kids

May 15th, 2012

We have often heard the phrase, “Jerry’s kids” in reference to entertainer Jerry Lewis and his famous telethons to raise money to find a cure for Muscular Dystrophy. We use it here to point out that Governor Jerry Brown’s revised state budget hurts California  young people by taking away any chance they have to receive a quality education and adequate health care. 

California young people are neither rich or famous. They don’t have anyone that can write them a check to attend school or visit the doctor when they get sick. Most have to live with their parents (if they are still alive) and really don’t know where to turn. They work  jobs that pay minimum wage and often have to work more than one job. Many don’t have cars and depend on public transportation to get around.

While we agree with Governor Brown that California is in a dire financial situation, we don’t support the notion that further cuts to education and health services are necessary. Our young people should not be sacrificed on the alter of corporate greed. We believe that there are other ways out of this crisis that make more sense and protect working people, something the governor swore to do when he took the oath of office. We have a simple plan that can generate the necessary tax revenue to fund our state and keep it solvent for years to come. We suggest increasing the corporate tax rate and putting taxes on oil companies that drill in California. Several other states do this including Louisiana, Texas, and Alaska. We suggest, and have for many years, a split tax roll. Why should commercial properties be taxed at the same rate as residential properties? We all know that a person’s home is his or her castle, but how many of you have an oil well in your back yard? I think you understand our point. So, let’s rally for our future: our young people. Let’s give them the same opportunity that we had. 

Mission To Moscow

April 4th, 2012

The Los Angeles Branch of the U.S. Friends of Soviet People (USFSP) will be showing the movie, “Mission To Moscow” on Friday evening, April 6 at 7pm. Coffee and refreshments will be served. You can join the Los Angeles Branch of USFSP for $5! Come and join us on Good Friday evening: L.A. Workers’ Center, 1251 S. St. Andrews Pl., L.A. 90019

FOR MORE INFORMATION:  usfsp.la@hotmail.com

U.S. Friends of Soviet People

Recent NLRB Decisions

April 4th, 2012

Follow this link to skip to the main content

NLRB Logo
Connect with the NLRB

Summary of NLRB Decisions for Week of March 26-30, 2012

 

 

The Weekly Summary is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to substitute for the opinions of the NLRB.  Inquiries should be directed to the Office of Public Affairs at Publicinfo@nlrb.gov or 202-273-1991.

 

Summarized Board Decision

LA Film School, LLC and its branch, LA Recording School, LLC (31‑CA‑029627 et al.; 358 NLRB No. 21) Los Angeles, CA, March 26, 2012.

The Board unanimously adopted the administrative law judge’s findings that the employer, LA Film School, violated Section 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) of the Act during a union organizing drive.  Specifically, the school violated Section 8(a)(3) by suspending and later terminating an employee for participating in union organizing activities.  The school also violated Section 8(a)(1) when: the Program Director threatened the employee and told her to keep him apprised of her whereabouts; another Program Director told employees not to attend a union meeting; the Vice President exempted certain employees from a pay cut in response to the union campaign and expelled a union organizer from the school’s premises; the school adopted a new security policy in response to union access to its premises; and, the President and CEO solicited employees to revoke their union representation cards.

Charges filed by California Federation of Teachers and an individual.  Administrative Law Judge Robert A. Ringler issued his decision on April 6, 2011.  Chairman Pearce and Members Hayes and Griffin participated.

***

Century Restaurant and Buffet, Inc., d/b/a Best Century Buffet, Inc., and Century Buffet Grill, LLC (22‑CA‑029242; 358 NLRB No. 23) Clifton, NJ, March 27, 2012.

The Board affirmed the administrative law judge’s finding that the employer violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by unilaterally changing employees’ terms and conditions of employment because of its employees’ union or concerted activities and by coercively interrogating employees about conduct protected by Section 7 of the Act.  Member Hayes found it unnecessary to pass on whether certain questions posed by the employer were unlawful as any such findings are cumulative and do not affect the remedy.  The Board found that the employer also violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by discharging an employee because of her union and concerted activity and denied the employer’s motion to reopen the record as the evidence the employer sought to adduce was not shown to be newly discovered or previously unavailable.

Charge filed by 318 Restaurant Workers’ Union.  Administrative Law Judge Steven Davis issued his decision on May 2, 2011. Chairman Pearce and Members Hayes and Griffin participated.

***

Center for Social Change, Inc. (05-CA-072211; 358 NLRB No. 24) Elkridge, Baltimore County, and Howard County, MD, March 29, 2012.

The Board, Chairman Pearce, Members Hayes, Griffin, Flynn and Block granted the Acting General Counsel’s motion for summary judgment in this test of certification case.  The Board rejected the respondent’s contentions that summary judgment was not appropriate because The President’s recess appointment of three Board members, as well as his appointment of the Acting General Counsel, were invalid.  The Board also rejected the respondent’s challenge to the conduct of the election in the underlying representation proceeding.

The respondent first contended that the Board lacked a quorum to act under New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB, 130 S. Ct. 2635 (2010).  The respondent claimed that The President’s January 4, 2012 recess appointments of Members Griffin, Flynn, and Block occurred while the United States Senate was in session and were made without seeking the advice and consent of the Senate, in violation of Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution.  Accordingly, the respondent argued that The President’s appointments were unconstitutional, leaving the Board without a quorum to act.

The respondent also contended that the complaint should be dismissed because the Acting General Counsel did not lawfully hold his office at the time he directed the complaint to be issued.  In this regard, the respondent contended that The President’s appointment of the Acting General Counsel lapsed on July 31, 2010 – 40 days after his appointment – because no nomination had yet been submitted to the Senate to fill the position of General Counsel pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §153(d).  The respondent further argued that the longer period allowed by the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 is not applicable.

The Board majority, Chairman Pearce, Members Griffin and Block, rejected both arguments, stating that historically the Board has declined to determine the merits of claims attacking the validity of presidential appointments and instead has applied the presumption of regularity of the official acts of public officers in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, citing Lutheran Home at Moorestown,334 NLRB 340, 340-41 (2001).

Members Flynn and Hayes also rejected the respondent’s arguments, but with separate rationale.  Member Flynn stated that he would apply the Lutheran Homes precedent solely to the extent of its holding that it is inappropriate for the Board to decide, in the context of a test of certification summary judgment case, the validity of an Acting General Counsel’s appointment under the Federal Vacancies Act.  Member Flynn added that he would not rely on any presumption of regularity.  As to the validity of the challenged Board member recess appointments, Member Flynn would find no jurisdictional basis for the Board to decide that issue but again would not rely on any presumption of regularity.

Member Hayes also would find no jurisdictional basis for the Board to decide either the challenge to the Acting General Counsel’s appointment or the Board member recess appointments.  Member Hayes would not rely on a presumption of regularity in either instance and stated that he disagreed with the Board’s reliance on such a presumption in Lutheran Homes.

Charge filed by Service Employees International Union, Local 500.   Chairman Pearce and Members Hayes, Griffin, Flynn, and Block participated.

***

 

Unpublished Board Decisions in Representation and Unfair Labor Practice Cases

R Cases

A&E Transportation (03-UD-000237) Rochester, NY, March 26, 2012.  Decision and certification of results of election.  Petitioner – an individual.

Printpack, Inc. (25-UD-067434) Greensburg, IN, March 27, 2012.  Decision and certification of results of election.  Petitioner – an individual.

Pitco Foods (20-RC-073804) West Sacramento, CA, March 27, 2012.  Order denying employer’s request for review of the Regional Director’s decision and direction of election.  Petitioner – Teamsters, Local 150.  Members Hayes, Griffin, and Flynn participated.

Terminix International Company, LP (21-RC-064769) City of Commerce, CA, March 28, 2012.  Decision, order (election conducted on October 28, 2012 be set aside and a new election be conducted), and direction of second election.  Petitioner – Communications Workers of America, Local 9586, AFL-CIO.

KIRO TV (19-UC-000775) Seattle, WA, March 29, 2012.  Order denying employer’s request for review of the Acting Regional Director’s decision and order clarifying unit.  Petitioner – International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 46.  Chairman Pearce and Members Hayes and Griffin participated.

Approved Moving & Storage, Inc. (29-RC-067273) Brooklyn, NY, March 29, 2012.  Decision and certification of results of election.  Petitioner – Recycling Airport Industrial Service Employees Union, Local 124.

AES Industries, Inc. (06-RC-061925) Wheeling, WV, March 29, 2012.  Decision and order adopting the Regional Director’s report and remanding proceeding to the Regional Director for further appropriate action.  Petitioner – Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local 33 of Northern Ohio, AFL-CIO.

Paragon Systems, Inc. (21-UD-070439) Los Angeles, CA, March 29, 2012.  Decision and certification of results of election.  Petitioner – International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA).

Isabella County Board of Commissioners (07-WH-070240) Mt. Pleasant, MI, March 29, 2012.  Certification of representative as bona fide under Section 7(B) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.  Petitioner – Police Officers Association of Michigan.

Brown County Sheriff’s Office (18-WH-073430) New Ulm, MN, March 29, 2012.  Certification of representative as bona fide under Section 7(B) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.  Petitioner – Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., Local 98.

Alternatives Unlimited, Inc. (01-RC-064761) Boston, MA, March 30, 2012.  Decision and order remanding proceeding to the Regional Director for further appropriate action.  Petitioner – Service Employees International Union, Local 509.

C Cases

Midwestern Personnel Services, Inc. and Transport Labor Contract/Leasing, Inc. (25‑CA‑025503, et al.) Boonville, IN, March 26, 2012.  Order granting joint motion to remand proceeding to Regional Director for approval of a settlement agreement.  Charge filed by Teamsters, Local 215.

Utility Block Company, Inc. (28-CA-060750) Albuquerque, NM, March 27, 2012.  Order adopting the administrative law judge’s findings and conclusions and ordering the respondent to take recommended action.  Charge filed by Laborers’ International Union of North America, Local 16.

New Vista Nursing and Rehabilitation, LLC (22-CA-029988) Newark, NJ, March 27, 2012.  Order denying respondent’s motions for reconsideration.  Charge filed by 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, NJ Region.  Members Hayes, Griffin, and Block participated.

***

 

Appellate Court Decisions

PPG Industries, Inc. v. NLRB, Board Case No. 33-CB-004317(reported at 356 NLRB No. 127) (D.C. Circuit decided March 30, 2012).

In an unpublished judgment, the Court held that substantial evidence supported the Board’s dismissal of a complaint alleging that the steelworkers union bargained in bad faith.

The Board found that, despite the union’s claim that it was bargaining “provisionally” to preserve a legal challenge to the timeliness of the employer’s mid-term bargaining proposals, the union “never refused to meet and confer with [the employer,]” and actively participated in “19 negotiating sessions, advancing proposals, and making concessions.”  On review, the Court held that those findings “are supported by substantial evidence and are otherwise reasonable.”  As the Court observed:  “No evidence compels the conclusion that the Union bargained in bad faith, and the Board did not otherwise act unreasonably in reaching its decision.”  It therefore denied the employer’s petition for review.

***

Barstow Community Hospital, Board Case No. 31-CA-26057 (reported at 356 NLRB No. 15) (9th Circuit decided March 26, 2012).

In this former two-member case, the Ninth Circuit enforced the Board’s order in full, agreeing that the hospital failed to show that the nurse it admittedly discharged for engaging in union activity was a statutory supervisor.

In 2001, the hospital hired the discriminatee as an emergency room nurse.  On an ad hoc basis, she would serve as “acting clinical coordinator,” where she would mostly perform her nursing work, but occasionally rely on a manual employees called “The Brains” to dole out assignments.  In spring 2002, after the discriminatee discussed unionization with a coworker on a shift as acting clinical coordinator, the hospital first interrogated and then fired her.  The hospital claimed that the discriminatee was a supervisor when serving as acting clinical coordinator, and, therefore, had no right to organize during those times.  The Board disagreed, concluding that the hospital failed to show that acting clinical coordinators exercised their assignment power with independent judgment.  The Court enforced, simply noting that substantial evidence supported the Board’s conclusion.

Before reaching that main issue, however, the Court addressed two other matters.  First, it rejected the hospital’s complaint that, because of the intervening Oakwood Healthcare trilogy, the Board should have allowed the hospital to belatedly claim that the discriminatee was a supervisor as a registered nurse.  The Court, however, disagreed:  The hospital “was on notice of [the precursor to Oakwood, NLRB v. Kentucky River Community Care, 532 U.S. 706 (2001),] long before the Oakwood Healthcare trilogy and the initial hearing” here; therefore, the “effort to introduce ‘new’ evidence of [the discriminatee's] supervisory status after the initial hearing . . . was untimely.”  Next, the Court held that the hospital “received meaningful review” from the Board panel deciding the case after New Process, relying on the presumption of regularity in agency proceedings.

The Court’s unpublished opinion is available here.

***

 

Decisions of Administrative Law Judges

Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort, an Enterprise of the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan(07‑CA‑053586; JD-17-12) Mount Pleasant, MI.  Charge filed by International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW).  Administrative Law Judge Michael A. Rosas issued his decision of March 26, 2012.

AFL Web Printing (22-CA-029494; JD(NY)-06-12) Secaucus, NJ.  Charge filed by Local One‑L, Amalgamated Lithographers of America, GCC/IBT.  Administrative Law Judge Steven Fish issued his decision on March 27, 2012.

Food Services of America, Inc., a subsidiary of Services Group of America, Inc. (28‑CA‑063052; JD(NY)-07-12) Phoenix, AZ.  Charge filed by an individual.  Administrative Law Judge Joel P. Biblowitz issued his decision on March 27, 2012.

Wayron, LLC (19-CA-032983; JD(SF)-12-12) Longview, WA.  Charge filed by International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers of America, Local 104; The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, District Lodge 160, Local Lodge 1350; and International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, District Council 5.  Administrative Law Judge Gerald A Wacknov issued his decision on March 29, 2012.

G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. (28-CA-023380; JD(SF)-14-12) Tempe, AZ.  Charge filed by International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA).  Administrative Law Judge Eleanor Laws issued her decision on March 29, 2012.

***


 

 

Car Wash Workers WIN!

October 30th, 2011

Steelworkers Say Take It To The Streets!

October 7th, 2011

October 7, 2011
Fed Up? Occupy the Streets!
The USW is no stranger to fighting for a more just economy for everyone.
It’s in our blood and has been from the day we were formed. It’s why we’re
fighting against bad trade agreements and fighting for jobs right now. And,
it’s why we’re supporting the 99 percent who have been left behind as the
grassroots “Occupy Wall Street” movement grows.
USW International President Leo W. Gerard offered our union’s support
last week and since then many other unions have also expressed
solidarity. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the union movement is
“opening arms and hearts” to these brave activists who are fighting for all
of us.
Around the nation, Steelworkers and other unions are joining Occupy Wall
Street events and lending support to the students, the unemployed and
others who are demanding jobs, a fair economy and a better future. We’re
opening our union halls, buying pizza, making signs, joining
demonstrations and helping out in any way we can.
Join in and speak out!
Find a march, rally or activity near you by visiting:

http://www.meetup.com/occupytogether/

Or, check here for an alternative listing of 200+
links to city events and facebook pages:
http://bit.ly/of5cKV

USW Rapid Response  (412) 562-2291  http://www.uswrr.org


 

Unemployment Insurance

October 7th, 2011

State Unemployment Insurance Benefits

Purpose

In general, the Federal-State Unemployment Insurance Program provides unemployment benefits to eligible workers who are unemployed through no fault of their own (as determined under State law), and meet other eligibility requirements of State law.

  • Unemployment insurance payments (benefits) are intended to provide temporary financial assistance to unemployed workers who meet the requirements of State law.
  • Each State administers a separate unemployment insurance program within guidelines established by Federal law.
  • Eligibility for unemployment insurance, benefit amounts and the length of time benefits are available are determined by the State law under which unemployment insurance claims are established.
  • In the majority of States, benefit funding is based solely on a tax imposed on employers. (Three (3) States require minimal employee contributions.)

Labor Joins the Occupy Wall Street Movement

October 7th, 2011

This week, union workers in NYC and all across the nation joined the Occupy Wall Street movement, a “leaderless resistance made up of the 99 percent of Americans that can no longer take the greed and corruption of the wealthiest 1 percent.” The movement has been steadily gaining momentum and is rapidly spreading across the nation, as more are hitting the streets every day to protest at banks and financial institutions in every corner of the country.

Upwards of 25 Occupy Wall Street solidarity groups have already popped up in California. In LA, an ‘occupation’ outside the OneWest Bank president’s Pasadena mansion directly resulted in the bank’s decision to stop the pending foreclosure and eviction of one working-class homeowner, Rose Gudiel. And at ‘Occupy Sacramento’, more than a dozen protestors were arrested – but their fellow protestors were there to greet them when they were released from jail, and the committed group went directly back to the occupation.

Now is the time to get involved in an ‘occupation’ and support the 99% in your community, and make sure you spread the word (and enthusiasm) to your friends, family and co-workers.


 

NLRB Chairman Pearce issues statement on Congressional hearing about Board actions

September 22nd, 2011

September 22, 2011

Contact:
Office of Public Affairs
202-273-1991
publicinfo@nlrb.gov [1]
www.nlrb.gov [2]
This morning, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce held a hearing to discuss “Recent Actions of the National Labor Relations Board.”  In response to requests for comment, NLRB Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce issued the following statement:”The National Labor Relations Board takes very seriously its obligation to enforce the law as enacted by Congress in a fair and even-handed way. Since August of last year, the Board issued more than 400 decisions, finding for employer interests in some, labor union interests in others, and individual employee interests in still others. In its hearing today, the Committee chose to focus on three decisions issued in late August. Two of them reversed previous Board rulings that were themselves highly controversial when they issued. The third clarified a confusing standard, allowing a group of Certified Nursing Assistants at a nursing home in Alabama to exercise their choice on union representation through a secret ballot election. Finally, the Board issued a rule which requires employers under the jurisdiction of the NLRB to post a notice of employee rights under our law, including the right to refrain from union activity, available for free download from our website. To my mind, these actions represent pursuit of the mission that Congress gave this agency – to protect worker free choice, promote collective bargaining and preserve labor peace.”


Source URL: http://www.nlrb.gov/news/nlrb-chairman-pearce-issues-statement-congressional-hearing-about-board-actions

Links:
[1] mailto:publicinfo@nlrb.gov
[2] http://www.nlrb.gov


 

Labor Tribute to Paul Robeson

September 13th, 2011

Robeson Display Traces Singer’s Fight for Equality and Unions

by Mike Hall, Sep 10, 2011

Paul Robeson, once the premier African American artist of the 20th century, is well known as a scholar, athlete, actor and activist. Less well known is his long commitment to the union movement and his belief that the achievement of full equality for African Americans and other people of color is inextricably linked with the full equality of America’s working men and women.

Now you can learn more about Robeson’s commitment to unions and equality at the Labor Arts‘ new virtual museum exhibit of ”Old Man River: Paul Robeson and the NMU.” According to the exhibit:

Symbolic of Robeson’s devotion to the labor movement is his close connection with the National Maritime Union (NMU), which emerged from a failed effort by dissident members of the International Seamen’s Union in 1936 to improve the poor working conditions of sailors on merchant ships of the time, and the racial discrimination that was practiced on American vessels.

 

Using labor and folk songs as the medium, this exhibit explores Robeson’s extraordinary efforts to use his prestige to oppose racial discrimination in hiring and operating ships and to secure humane living and working conditions for all sailors, including African Americans.

The exhibit features eight songs by Robeson in NMU settings: “Waterboy,” “The House I Live In,” “Ol’ Man River,” “Joe Hill,” “Oh, No John,” “It Ain’t Necessarily So,” “The Peat Bog Soldiers” and “Shenandoah.”

The Robeson exhibit is one of four exhibits Labor Arts is preparing on the NMU, which merged with the Seafarers (SIU) in 2001. Click here to view the exhibit and hear the songs.


 

More Attacks on the NLRB

September 13th, 2011

NLRB Bill Guts Workers’ Rights, Shields Boeing, Other Corporations

by Mike Hall, Sep 12, 2011

House Republicans have turned a routine complaint by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against Boeing into a “political and ideological circus,” says AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.

He says a Republican bill introduced after the NLRB’s complaint, which accuses the aviation giant of retaliating against workers for exercising their legal rights,

is sweeping legislation that would gut the National Labor Relations Act and result in serious harmful changes to jobs and workers’ rights throughout the country.

Trumka, Pat Bertucci, a Machinists (IAM) member and third generation Boeing worker, and University of Texas law professor Jack Getman took part in a telephone press conference today to set the record straight on the Republican House bill (H.R. 2587) that would cripple the NLRB’s ability to protect workers.

 

The NLRB charges that Boeing moved production away from its Washington State facility in retaliation for the workers exercising their right to strike, and that’s against the law.

The Republican bill would take away the NLRB’s authority to remedy unlawful conduct like Boeing is alleged to have engaged in. H.R. 2587 would apply to cases currently being considered, including the legal action against Boeing. It would allow corporations to freely retaliate against workers by transferring, subcontracting or offshoring jobs. For example, says Trumka:

If a group of workers walk out of a plant because of unsafe working conditions, the company could decide to move the work and the jobs rather than fix the problem, and the NLRB would be powerless to protect the workers and their jobs.

If a group of women or African Americans joined together to protest race or sex discrimination by their employer, the company could simply transfer the work somewhere else, and the NLRB would be powerless to protect the workers.

Bertucci says, “I’m not willing to sacrifice a right that goes back generations so that Boeing has an advantage.”

I’d like to see my daughter have the same opportunity as I did….If this bill passes, every American’s right to be in a union will be threatened.

In a separate press conference today, Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) said by removing the NLRB’s ability to hold corporations like Boeing accountable,  the Republican bill would allow a “disastrous race to the bottom for American workers’ rights, wages, benefits and working conditions.”

These attacks are designed to remove a vital check on corporate power overrunning our democracy. Working families don’t need smaller paychecks. And workers don’t need fewer protections on the job. But that’s what they will get if this bill becomes law.

So, this is my question: Will the Republican leadership work with us to create good jobs in this country and give Americans the opportunity to get ahead in this economy, or will they continue to only help those who are already ahead.

In South Carolina today, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney—who holds personal investments in Boeing—outlined his so-called labor policy and threw his support behind the Republican bill to cripple the NLRB. He also dispelled any lingering notion that he might not be as extreme and radically right wing as the other candidates when he called the members of the NLRB “labor stooges.”

South Carolina AFL-CIO President Donna Dewitt had a few choice words of her own for Romney.

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney seems more interested in scoring cheap political points for his election bid and supporting Boeing than in talking with working families in Charleston about their concerns for the creation of family-sustaining jobs.

Throughout his campaign, Romney has shown that his priorities lie with corporations and the rich, not working people in South Carolina or across the country.  Whether it is calling corporations “people” in Iowa or defending law-breaker Boeing at the expense of South Carolina workers here today, multimillionaire Romney has continued to prove he is out of touch with the struggles facing working families in America.