The Wall St. Journal has an interesting piece today about company e-mails that suggest possibly illegal anti-union activities at Starbucks.
The e-mails are central to a labor dispute between the coffee giant and the International Industrial Workers of the World (IWW).
The company emails show that managers have been fighting the union since 200. "Below is a summary of the recent developments in New York City regarding our attempts to thwart a potential union situation," begins an email dated Oct. 29, 2004 by a Starbucks New York regional official.
In subsequent emails, managers identify whether an employee is an "IWW supporter" and discuss when pro-union employees will be reviewed and those that are "at risk" of being terminated.
Taking action against an employee based on union sympathies, such as firing an employee or directly asking if they support the union, would be illegal, said Chuck Cohen, a former member of the National Labor Relations Board and a partner at Morgan Lewis & Bockius in Washington. But "employers speculating about individual union sympathies is not unlawful," he said.
Several times, managers expressed concern that emails could turn up in a legal case. On May 13, 2005, a manager warned: "Also, not to sound too 007 here but I am going to ask that we delete these messages after reading and stick to verbal conversations as none of this is protected under attorney client privilege and is subject to full disclosure."
4 comments:
I think it is industrial workers of the world (from above International Workers of the World is redundant)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World
just what we need, the unions ruining something else....why can't they see that in today's business climate, they are becoming less and less relevant?
The unions are becoming less and less relevant for everyone except those of us who work for wages.
I always find it interesting when anyone except an owner/officer/director/manager of a corporation is against unions. I can certainly understand why a factory owner who relies on workers' insecurity and fear to demand greater productivity for less money would be opposed to unions but why would a working class person oppose them? I have worked in management in both union and non-union environments both in this (US) country and others and the balance of power between workers and management is dramatically different when a union is present. Managers hate unions but why would a working person be against them? Does the corporate media really do such a great job of brainwashing in the US? It sounds like AgainstUnions believes that the US auto industry failed because of unions which is a common misconception. Perhaps you might look into successful European auto makers who have never been anything but unionized and have a standard of pay and benefits that American workers can only dream about. The US auto industry failed because of massive ineptitude at the management level in both lack of product innovation and financial irresponsibility. There is a reason that the highest standards of living in the world are present in countries with strong unions. As long as US workers are hostile to unions they will never achieve what workers in Sweden, Germany, Denmark have: universal health care, free education and an unrivaled standard of living. If that is irrelevant to you then keep on working for $8 an hour with no health care and no education.
Post a Comment