Wal-Mart Butchers Force Anti-Union Retailer to Eat Crow (July 7, 2003)
By Cynthia Green
After elaborate trickery designed to blunt union activity, the world's largest retailer has been forced to recognize and bargain with a United Food and Commercial Workers local.
Wal-Mart has a long and ugly history of shady anti-union tactics, but a National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge may have muzzled the company, at least temporarily.
Marking the first such labor victory at any of Wal-Mart's more than 3,200 U.S. stores, the NLRB's decision neuters the company ploy to void a successful union election by abruptly changing job descriptions.
In February of 2000, a dozen meat cutters in the Jacksonville, Texas, Wal-Mart voted for representation by UFCW Local 540. By July of that year, the company had abruptly replaced fresh meat with pre-packaged products in all of its stores, neatly eliminating the need for skilled meat cutters and rendering the election moot. The company was reportedly proud of its novel "union avoidance strategy."
Three years of legal battles finally produced a stunning win for the UFCW. In June 2003, an NLRB judge ordered Wal-Mart to restore the meat department to its prior structure, complete with meat-cutting, and to recognize and bargain with the union over the effects of any change to case-ready meat sales, for which purposes Local 540 will represent the workers.
"The elimination of work requiring their special skills greatly affected both job satisfaction and future earning potential," administrative law judge Keltner Locke wrote of the former meat cutters in his ruling.
"This is a historic decision—the first bargaining order issued against Wal-Mart in the United States," UFCW Executive Vice President Mike Leonard said. "It is a victory for all Wal-Mart workers who are fighting for a voice at work."
Al Zack, assistant director of the UFCW's strategic programs, said, "Wal-Mart's not above the law, and that's the message the decision sends to Wal-Mart workers."
But Zack noted that the judge ruled the bargaining unit non-existent, effective July 2000, when Wal-Mart unilaterally decided to move to pre-packaged meat.
"We're going to be appealing that part of this decision," Zack said, adding that Wal-Mart, too, is appealing other sections.
In a brief to be filed later this week, the UFCW will be arguing that there is a continuing "community of interest" that sets the meat cutters apart.
Though the judge disagreed with the union on the community-of-interest issue, he did find the former meat cutters still have separate supervision, distinct skill requirements, generally higher pay, are hired specifically for the meat department and transfer in and out of the department less frequently than in other areas of the stores, Zack said.
"These findings, we believe, help our appeal," Zack said.
The union does not know, however, how many workers it might now be representing, nor anything about their pay levels. The company has refused to hand over this and other basic worker information, but the judge has ordered that Wal-Mart comply.
Wal-Mart has indicated it will be appealing the information portion of the decision as well as the "status quo ante" section, which would re-establish the meat-cutting division in the department, Zack said.
A final decision by the NLRB in Washington is expected next summer, he said.
The judge's June decision sparked renewed interest in organizing by Wal-Mart workers across the country, Zack said.
"But there is still so much fear out there," Zack said. "Employees are deathly afraid that Wal-Mart will get rid of people" who try to organize themselves or who seek union representation, he said.
Wal-Mart has already informally settled on back pay to four illegally fired meat-department workers, and there have been other such settlements around the country, Zack said.
These actions prevent adjudicated decisions that can highlight the company's record of breaking the law. An established pattern can encourage the NLRB to seek stronger remedies, Zack said, adding that it's a long process.
"But I can't force people to give up the money when they need it," he said.
Wal-Mart's defeat in its battle with Local 540 comes amid a company-wide sex discrimination scandal.
More than a million current and former female Wal-Mart workers have prepared a lawsuit that could wind up being the largest job discrimination class action in history. Wal-Mart's own workforce data indicates that the company short-changes women on promotions and pay, plaintiffs alleged.
In other Wal-Mart news, the retail giant that has squeezed out countless family-owned small businesses across rural America faces an odd charge this week in a Coshocton, Ohio courtroom. A local man is suing the company for nearly $1 million, alleging that a half dozen dog food dishes fell off the store shelves and on to his head.
Wal-Mart is the largest retailer in the world, employing more than one million workers in the U.S. and another 300,000 internationally. Its chief executive, Scott Lee, brought home more than $18 million in compensation in 2002, doubling his 2001 haul. The company's annual revenues are roughly $230 billion.
You can't figure that part out?
