BrucePac’s workers say no to union
By DON McINTOSH
Associate Editor
At a pair of cooked meat and poul-
try processing plants in Woodburn and
Silverton, Oregon, a group of 284
mostly immigrant workers will remain
nonunion. A July 26 election, con-
ducted at BrucePac by the National La-
bor Relations Board (NLRB), resulted
in 57 votes for joining Laborers Local
296, and 189 against.
The union effort was led by a group
of BrucePac workers, with support
from Local 296 Business Agent Jack
Roy and Spanish-speaking dispatcher
Dagoberta Aranda. To oppose the cam-
paign, BrucePac employed the nation-
ally-known anti-union law firm Jack-
son Lewis, and held over a month of
workplace “classes” which were led by
Spanish-speaking consultants.
Ironically, BrucePac was the test
case in a 2010 federal court lawsuit in
which the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
tried to strike down the Worker Free-
dom Act — a 2009 Oregon law which
bans mandatory anti-union meetings.
The law makes it illegal for employers
to discipline workers for refusing to at-
tend such meetings. No workers were
disciplined for refusing attendance at
BrucePac, but lawyers for the company
and the Chamber argued that their free
speech rights were infringed because
they held off holding the mandatory
AUGUST 3, 2012
meetings. U.S. District Court Judge
Michael Mosman tossed out the law-
suit, saying the plaintiffs were prema-
ture to sue before any worker had made
use of the law. In the event, BrucePac
appears to have complied with the law
that the meetings not be mandatory.
Aranda, the Local 296 dispatcher, said
workers were afraid to refuse atten-
dance. But several workers did refuse,
and weren’t disciplined.
Aranda said he was surprised by the
election result. Workers had motive to
want a union, including management
mistreatment and wages of $9.50 to
$14 an hour — for hard work in very
hot and cold work environments.
“Out of all the places I’ve ever heard
of, this place really deserves a union,”
Aranda said.
But on June 29, 2009, three weeks
after an initial meeting with the union,
BrucePac laid off 17 union supporters,
nearly every worker who had attended
the meeting. Local 296 filed a flurry of
charges with the NLRB, and a federal
administrative law judge ordered rein-
statement and back pay for three of the
workers after a February 2010 trial.
BrucePac complied with the order, and
two workers accepted reinstatement.
But the company also appealed the
judge’s decision to the full Board in
Washington, DC. Two years later, the
case is still pending.
In the meantime, Local 296 stayed
in touch with pro-union workers at the
company, and on June 19, requested
the union election.
Local 296 filed an unfair labor prac-
tice charge protesting company re-
moval of union literature from a bul-
letin board, but later withdrew the
charge.
Several weeks before the vote,
“Union No” stickers were so common
in the workplace that Aranda says he
advised pro-union workers to wear the
stickers as well, to take the pressure off.
But Aranda said one known pro-union
worker had her truck windows
smashed the day she put a sticker on.
Aranda also thinks the company
may have had union staff followed:
Workers told him that a video shown
during the anti-union meetings in-
cluded images of Aranda at a bar and
Local 296 business manager Ken Mor-
gan at an airport, with consultants in-
sinuating that member dues permit
union leaders to live the high life. Con-
sultants also reportedly warned that
unionizing could lead to strikes, and
that strikes could cost workers their
jobs.
Looking at the vote count, Aranda
says it’s clear the consultant strategies
worked.
“They had more time and money
and were willing to do whatever it took
to make sure it didn’t happen,” Aranda
said.
NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS
Busted!
A sampler of recent charges of employer labor law violations at
the local office of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
Pro-union? You're fired
Several months went by at the National Labor Relations Board's
Portland office without any charges that workers were fired for
union-type activity, but this summer the charges poured in. Two
wind turbine maintenance workers said Vestas American Wind
Technology fired them in February for union activity. Portland In-
dustrial Workers of the World said Livin Spoonful, a maker of
vegan raw crackers, terminated a worker June 6 because of union
activity. At Universal Recycling Technologies, United Steelwork-
ers said two workers were fired in January and February. And
Communications Workers of America Local 7901 said Fund for
the Public Interest, which does fundraising for OSPIRG and En-
vironment Oregon, fired a fourth pro-union worker and threatened
the recently unionized call center with closure.
AT&T manager: ‘I’ll put a target on your back’
CWA Local 7901 says an area manager at AT&T Mobility retail
has gone rogue, acting like there’s no contract, and openly discrimi-
nating against workers for being active in the union. Unionists say
he publicly berated a steward, told a worker he’d put a target on his
back if he sought out the union, and warned groups of workers that
the union can’t save their jobs, so it’s not worth it to get involved.
Trees Inc charged with harassing union steward
Todd Williams, a union tree-trimmer in Coos Bay, believes man-
agers at Trees, Inc. tried to intimidate him — because he’s been ac-
tive filing grievances on behalf of co-workers. Williams says the
day before a scheduled arbitration on a grievance he had filed, a
manager told him at the beginning of his shift that his job was at
risk. Then, near the end of his shift, a district supervisor walked
right up to him at a Pacific Power pole yard and proceeded to
scream at him for several minutes, ordering him to clean vehicle
windows and mirrors. Williams is a union steward and member of
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 659. His
complaint was investigated by the NLRB, but it dismissed the
charge on July 18.
PAGE 9