U.S. Labor Board may issue complaint against Wal-Mart on strikes

NEW YORK Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:15pm EST

Walmart workers on strike walk a picket line during a protest over unsafe working conditions and poor wages outside a Walmart store in Pico Rivera, California, October 4, 2012. REUTERS/Jonathan Alcorn

Walmart workers on strike walk a picket line during a protest over unsafe working conditions and poor wages outside a Walmart store in Pico Rivera, California, October 4, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Alcorn

Related Topics

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. National Labor Relations Board on Monday said it has authorized legal action against Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT.N) for allegedly retaliating against workers who participated in strikes against the company over low pay.

Groups of Walmart workers went on strike nationwide on November 22, 2012, to protest the retailer's wages and worker benefits. The day after Thanksgiving, known as Black Friday, is typically the busiest shopping day of the year. The workers also went on strike in May and June before the company's annual shareholder meeting.

The company retaliated against employees who joined those strikes by firing them, threatening to fire them or disciplining them, the NLRB said in a statement on Monday. The labor board also said that a Walmart spokesman made comments on television threatening workers who planned to join the November protests.

Wal-Mart spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan said the company disagrees with the board's action.

"We believe this is just a procedural step and we will pursue our options to defend the company because we believe our actions were legal and justified," she said. "The fact is we provide good jobs and unparalleled opportunities for our associates."

NO UNIONIZED LABOR

The NLRB is the U.S. agency that enforces the nation's labor laws. It oversees union elections, polices unfair labor practice claims and is charged with enforcing the U.S. National Labor Relations Act, which allows employees to work together to improve their workplace conditions.

The NLRB's general counsel's office would bring any complaint against the retailer if one results. Last month a divided Senate confirmed a former union lawyer to the general counsel's position, essentially the agency's top prosecutor.

The protests were orchestrated by a coalition of union and workers' rights groups, including the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and OUR Walmart, which have pushed for better wages and benefits at the company.

Walmart has no unionized labor in the United States.

"The board's decision confirms what Walmart workers have long known: the company is illegally trying to silence employees who speak out for better jobs," Sarita Gupta of the pro-worker group Jobs for Justice said in a statement.

The NLRB said on Monday that it will issue a complaint against the retailing giant if it cannot reach a settlement with the workers.

"We anticipate the charges will be filed within a week or two if a settlement can't be arranged," an NLRB spokesman told Reuters.

If no settlement is reached and a complaint is filed, Walmart and the board would likely go before an administrative law judge for a trial proceeding.

(Reporting by Carlyn Kolker; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh, Bernard Orr)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
From extensive NRLB experience, I think I can say that Walmart doesn’t have a worry. Might be costly, but they should prevail. Even if the Democrat prosecutor files an action, and wins, it won’t hold. If a company doesn’t like the decision, they can appeal to the Federal Courts. If they don’t give relief, it can go to the Supreme Court. I think the unions WOULD NOT want this to go to an Appeals Court or Supreme Court, because the precedent would be a real killer for futurer union actions. Plus, the Appeals Court would be in St Louis, and highly company favorable. (I have been at the company table numerous times before an admin-law-judge and against the UAW. Have yet to lose any money or bargaining position.)

Nov 18, 2013 7:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:
It used to be – an American Company with American goods; that paid a good wage. My brother worked there years ago, and I believe made almost $12 an hour – which is good for this area, especially in the early 90′s, if I recall correctly.

But then – Sam Walton passed away. His kids changed it to an American company with pretty much all foreign goods that pays pathetically.

And they wonder why some people won’t shop there out of principle…

It just seemed to me, when Sam Walton ran it, it was about the people… the customers and the employees. Now, it’s about the stock price and profit.

We need a new chain – like the one Sam Walton founded. There’s a demand… who will create it?

I think this year – I’ll shop at the Flea Market and buy locally made goods and help out my ‘neighbors’ – instead of the board of directors at Wal-Mart; the Supersellout.

Nov 19, 2013 9:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.