New England Biz Law Update
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is pushing for Trader Joe’s to recognize and bargain with a union at a New York store, despite a failed unionization vote last year. This move comes under a new NLRB framework designed to address unfair labor practices during union elections.
In April 2023, employees at Trader Joe’s Lower East Side location participated in a union election that resulted in a tie – 76 votes for and 76 against unionization. Typically, this result would halt unionization efforts.
However, the NLRB has taken further action, utilizing its “Cemex framework,” an approach designed to address situations where unfair labor practices may have influenced union election outcomes. This framework allows the labor board to order a company to recognize and bargain with a union, even without a successful vote.
The NLRB’s general counsel issued a complaint against Trader Joe’s, alleging unfair labor practices during the election process.
The accusations include:
- Requiring employees to attend one-on-one meetings where anti-union views were expressed.
- Banning union literature from break rooms and removing such materials when found.
- Telling workers that unionization would lead to strikes and disrupt their work.
Under the complaint, the NLRB alleges that election results were compromised due to managers’ behavior. Prior to the election, a majority of workers had expressed their desire to unionize through authorization cards.
Trader Joe’s United, an independent union formed in 2022, filed for a bargaining order under the Cemex framework. They are asking the NLRB to disregard the tied vote and require Trader Joe’s to recognize the union based on the alleged unfair practices.
A hearing is scheduled for January 2024 to address this case.
The outcome could impact not only Trader Joe’s but potentially set a precedent for how failed union votes are handled when employer interference is alleged.
Trader Joe’s, along with other major retailers like Amazon and Starbucks, has previously challenged the constitutionality of the NLRB.
