On December 21, The National Labor Relations Board voted 2-1 in favor of new steps to increase the speed of union elections.  The Board hopes to keep election and campaign time to less than 21 days.  Often, there are long delays to unionizing elections because of legal challenges brought by the employer.  The Board wants to require that these challenges be postponed until after the employees have voted for or against the union.  These changes were first proposed in June and the NLRB held public hearings and reviewed thousands of public comments.  The new rules will likely be challenged by employers in court.  More coverage here.

This was the Board’s last major policy decision before it lost one member, which leaves it without a quorum to act.  President Obama has nominated Sharon Block and Richard Griffin to the Board.  Ms. Block is currently deputy assistant secretary of Congressional affairs with the Labor Department.  Mr. Griffin has served on the board of the AFL-CIO Lawyers Coordinating Committee since 1994 and is general counsel to the International Union of Operating Engineers.  Republicans may well block these nominations in an effort to prevent the Board from functioning at all.  More coverage here.

Categories: Legislative Action Tags: AFL-CIO, Congress, IUOE, Labor and Employment, NLRB, President Obama, Union Elections, Unions

The public policy research group Dēmos and the non-profit Young Invincibles, published a new report which came out last month.  The report analyzes the economic status of the “Millennial Generation” as compared to previous generations.  ”The analysis reveals the failure of public investment and public policy to provide young people with the means to achieve economic security and sustain the middle class.”  The report can be found here.

Introduction to the Jobs and the Economy section:

“Our nation has experienced profound economic change over the last three decades. Globalization, new technologies, and deliberate public policies shifted our economy from the production of goods to the production of knowledge and services. As millions of unionized factory jobs moved overseas, our nation lost a primary source of middle-class jobs for people without college degrees. Less-educated workers now have few options outside of non-unionized, low-wage service occupations.”

Categories: General News Tags: Demos, Economic Security, Jobs, Labor and Employment, Middle Class, Unions

Last, week, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) and Boeing reached a tentative agreement which would extend the Union’s contract for four years and, when ratified, will increase wages, maintain and improve traditional pensions and add new jobs.  The Union and Boeing have been in a troubled relationship recently since Boeing decided to build a new plant for its 787 Dreamliner in South Carolina where unions are weak.  The National Labor Relations Board filed a suit claiming that Boeing had decided to build the new plant in South Carolina in illegal retaliation against the Union for striking.  That case now looks like it may be dropped if the new contract is ratified by the Boeing employees.   Additional coverage here.

Categories: General News Tags: Collective Bargaining Agreement, IAMAW, Jobs, Labor and Employment, NLRB, Unions

In International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local Union No. 289 v. Verizon South, Inc., the Union has filed suit in federal court (Middle District of North Carolina) to compel the company to engage in arbitration regarding the termination of an employee.  On behalf of the Union, Patterson Harkavy has filed this response brief and this reply brief.  Mike Okun and Narendra Ghosh are representing the Union.

This is a summary of the Union’s argument:  Because national labor policy strongly favors arbitration as the means for resolving labor disputes, courts must apply a presumption of arbitrability to collective bargaining agreements that contain arbitration provisions, and direct the parties to arbitrate unless the parties have expressly agreed not to arbitrate a particular matter.  Any doubt or ambiguity regarding arbitrability is to be resolved in favor of arbitration. 

Here, the parties’ collective bargaining agreement and separate settlement agreement for grievant Brian Pollard require arbitration of the grievance regarding Pollard’s termination because Pollard was not a “new employee” when he was rehired in 2010.  Moreover, to the extent the settlement agreement is ambiguous about permitting Pollard’s grievance to be arbitrated, that ambiguity must be construed in favor of arbitration.  Therefore, defendant’s motion to dismiss should be denied, and plaintiff’s motion to compel arbitration – filed this same day – should be granted.

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Briefs, Compel Arbitration, IBEW, Labor and Employment, Labor Arbitration, MDNC, Michael Okun, Narendra Ghosh, Unions

In, Cape Fear Public Transit Authority v. Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1328, the Wilmington transit authority is challenging a labor arbitration in favor of the Union, which ordered a terminated employee be put back to work.  This case is before federal Judge Boyle in the Eastern District of North Carolina.  Yesterday, Judge Boyle ruled for the Union, concluding that there were no grounds to reverse the arbitration decision.  Finding the city’s lawsuit to be “without justification,” Judge Boyle also awarded the Union its attorneys’ fees for defending this case.  Here is the opinion.  Mike Okun and Narendra Ghosh are representing the Union.

Categories: News of the Firm, Results Tags: ATU, EDNC, Judge Boyle, Labor and Employment, Michael Okun, Narendra Ghosh, Results, Unions

In, Cape Fear Public Transit Authority v. Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1328, the Wilmington transit authority is challenging a labor arbitration that was in favor of the Union, and which ordered a terminated employee be put back to work.  This case is before Judge Boyle in federal court (EDNC).  On behalf of the Union, Patterson Harkavy has filed the following brief, response brief, and reply brief.  Mike Okun and Narendra Ghosh are representing the Union.

Here is a summary of the Union’s position: 

First, plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed for failure to timely effect service because plaintiff did not properly serve defendant before the 120-day deadline elapsed, and had no good cause for its failure to do so.  Second, plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed because plaintiff CFPTA was not a party to the arbitration decision that it seeks to vacate, has no standing to challenge the decision, and has provided no relevant authority to demonstrate that it is permitted to bring this suit under 28 U.S.C. § 185. 

Third, plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed for failure to state a valid claim to vacate the arbitration decision.  The arbitrator correctly determined that Professional Transit Management of Wilmington, Inc. (“PTM”) violated the controlling collective bargain agreement (“CBA”) in terminating the grievant, and to the extent there was ambiguity in the operative language of the CBA, the arbitrator’s interpretation cannot be disturbed by the Court.  Under the standard enunciated by the Supreme Court, plaintiff has also failed to show how the arbitrator’s decision to reinstate the grievant violates any clearly established public policy.  For all these reasons, the Court should award defendant its reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in this litigation because plaintiff’s motion to vacate the arbitration award has no arguable basis in the law.

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: ATU, Briefs, EDNC, Judge Boyle, Labor and Employment, Labor Arbitration, Michael Okun, Narendra Ghosh, Unions

Even if Congress manages to extend emergency unemployment benefits for more the millions of workers who could receive them, about four million others will see their benefits end over the next year, unless an entirely new program is created.  This is according to a report recently issued by the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.  So, the crisis facing some now is going to be experienced by even more later, unless serious job-creating actions are taken.

You would think that the latest, terrible monthly jobs report would convince those in power that the Great Recession continues unabated, doing terrible damage to working families.  Those unemployed for long periods face especially long odds of finding work in today’s economy.  And, even for those with good jobs, wages are continuing to be cut as even profitable employers take advantage of the ongoing crisis for workers.

Misguided worries about the budget deficit are allowing Republicans and the Deficit Commission to pursue Social-Security-cutting, Medicare-slashing, job-destroying agenda instead of a program that can end the Great Recession and put people back to work.  A new course of action is needed, and responsible policy options are out there.  For instance, check out the program set out by Our Fiscal Security, a collaborative effort of Demos, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), and The Century Foundation (TCF).

Categories: General News Tags: Congress, Deficit Commission, Great Recession, Jobs, Labor and Employment, Medicare, Monthly Job Report, Our Fiscal Security, Social Security, Unemployment, Unemployment Benefits, Unemployment Extension, Unions, Wages

A strike at the Mott’s apple juice plant in New York highlights a significant issue besides the pay for these particular workers, as noted by this New York Times article: “The union movement and many outsiders view the strike as a high-stakes confrontation between a company that wants to cut its labor costs, even as it is earning record profits, and workers who are determined to resist demands for wage and benefit givebacks.”

The parent company here, Dr Pepper Snapple Group, is not alone in making large profits even as workers earn less and less.  Our economy, however, cannot start growing again on a sustainable basis unless workers’ wages increase.  The Great Recession shows that families need higher wages to prosper in the long run instead of relying on more and more debt.

Categories: General News Tags: Great Recession, Labor and Employment, New York Times, Strike, Unions, Wages

On behalf of two local IAM unions, Patterson Harkavy has prevailed in federal district court in a case challenging a labor arbitration decision.  This case arises from Plaintiff UGL UNICCO’s termination of union member Ronald Corbett.  UGL UNICCO provides facilities maintenance services at a tire plant in Wilson, North Carolina, owned by Bridgestone Firestone North American Tire.  Corbett was employed by UGL UNICCO and worked at the Bridgestone Plant.  Defendants Local 2541 and District 110 are constituent entities of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (“IAM”).  The IAM was represented in this case by Mike Okun and Narendra Ghosh.

The union challenged Corbett’s termination and the case was initially decided by an experienced labor arbitrator.  Corbett, a 34-year employee, did nothing wrong in getting fired, but was terminated without just cause because of Bridgestone’s unilateral decision.  This is commonly known as a persona non grata situation.  The arbitrator found that this firing violated the union’s contract with UNICCO, and award Corbett 68 weeks of pay as damages because she could not order Bridgestone to return him to work.  UNICCO challenged the arbitrator’s decision in federal court.

In his July 16, 2010 opinion, Judge Boyle affirmed the arbitrator’s award and granted the union’s motion to enforce it.  Judge Boyle reasoned:  Read more…

Categories: Judicial Decisions, Results Tags: Bridgestone, Eastern District of North Carolina, Federal Court, International Association of Machinists, Labor and Employment, Labor Arbitration, Michael Okun, Narendra Ghosh, Personan Non Grata, Results, UNICCO, Unions, Wilson

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions concerning whether particular issues had to be decided by an arbitrator or in federal court.  One care arose in the traditional area of labor arbitration between companies and unions; the second arose in the ever-growing area of employer-imposed arbitration agreements on regular employees.

In the first, Granite Rock v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the Court ruled for the company, as ScotusBlog describes:

The parties had reached a collective bargaining agreement (CBA), but they disagreed about both when the CBA was formed and who should decide that question.  Today the Court, in an opinion by Justice Thomas, held that a court, rather than an arbitrator, should decide when the CBA was formed.  The Court explained that under the CBA, arbitration is required only when a dispute “arise[s] under” the agreement – which a dispute over when the CBA was formed does not.  The Court also held that the lower court properly declined to recognize a new federal common-law cause of action against the parent international union, which – according to the employer – tortiously interfered with the CBA.

In the second, Rent-a-Center v. Jackson, the Court sided with the employer, and held that the issue of unconscionability (a challenge to whether the arbitration agreement is valid in the first place), was to be decided by the arbitrator, as Workplace Prof Blog describes:

The Court held the issue was governed by the separability doctrine of Prima Paint: an arbitration agreement is assailable only if the arbitration agreement itself — not the overall agreement of which the arbitration is a part — is assailable on state-contract law grounds.  So far, so good for Jackson — until today, this separability doctrine has been applied only when an arbitration agreement was part of a broader (“container”) agreement that was not related to arbitration — e.g., an arbitration provision in a consulting-services contract or in a larger employment contract.  Jackson’s unconscionability argument was directed squarely at his arbitration agreement.

Today, however, the Court extended Prima Paint to hold that the arbitration agreement itself can be the container contract, and that unconscionability arguments must be directed toward specific provisions of the arbitration agreement.  Jackson’s unconscionability arguments, the Court held, were directed at the arbitration agreement generally, and therefore could not be grounds for voiding the arbitration agreement as a whole.

Read the whole post for its insightful analysis of how the Court erred, once again stretching the law to give a victory to employers over employees.

Categories: Judicial Decisions Tags: Arbitration Agreement, Case Commentary, CBA, Labor and Employment, Labor Arbitration, Teamsters, Unions, US Supreme Court