[ad_1]
The Teamsters, which represents security workers at Stanford Health Care (SHC), filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) alleging that SHC threatened security workers’ jobs and punished workers for organizing illegal activities.
A group of educators said the hospital system’s unions fear it could lead to “retrenchments” and that workers “could lose benefits” in a filing last month. The union filed another complaint this week alleging a worker was “threatened, intimidated and retaliated against” for exercising legally protected organizing rights.
The Teamsters Union received emails from several Stanford security officers, obtained by The Daily, detailing multiple NLRB violations. These include threats of replacement under contract security, job assignment changes since the union title was issued, promises of rewards for not unionizing, and more.
A group of educators have been trying to unify a group of more than 130 Stanford health care security workers, Bloomberg reported. Text. In April, Pablo Barrera, trade representative for Teamsters Local 853, which represents the guards, said the union asked Stanford to recognize him and negotiate with the union.
Stanford Health Care “respects the rights of all our employees and believes that it is their choice whether or not to join a union,” Stanford Health Care spokeswoman Julie Gracious wrote in a statement to the Daily.
Gracious declined to comment on the allegations of management-level threats raised in the filing.
According to Berrera, Stanford rejected the Teamsters’ request that, under the National Labor Relations Act, the proper way for workers to join a union is through labor board elections overseen by the NLRB.
Gracious wrote: “In this particular case, because the Teamsters represent other labor groups besides the guards, federal labor law precludes the Teamsters from pursuing a traditional grievance and NLRB election, a fact the Teamsters acknowledged and asserted.”
The statutory impediment referred to in Section 9(b)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act is “[N]If a labor organization accepts membership or is directly or indirectly affiliated with an organization that accepts workers other than guards for membership, it shall be certified as a representative of workers in labor negotiations.
As a Teamsters union, however, Stanford can voluntarily recognize the union and negotiate for a fairer contract.
Although Section 9(b)(3) prohibits the NLRB from holding elections for custodians seeking to be represented by a labor organization, an employer may recognize a voluntary ‘mixed custodian association’ that accepts both custodians and custodians. Barrera cites several cases in which this is possible.
California lawmakers, such as state representatives Ash Carla (27th District), Robert Rivas (30th District), Mark Stone (29th District) and Alex Lee (25th District) and state senator Dave Cortese (15th District), all joined Team Stern in urging Stanford. To follow this option.
Berrera outlined alternative procedures for establishing Teamsters Local 853 as a recognized bargaining representative for safety officers.
“First, the employer may voluntarily agree to a card check process conducted by FMCS or another approved independent third party. Second, the SHC and the union may agree to an agreed upon selection process for conducting selections by the California State Mediation and Conciliation Service (CSMCS) following the same policies and procedures followed by the NLRB.” Finally, the SHC and the union could agree on an election process through a private agency such as Unilect Election Services, which conducted multiple elections for labor and management.
“We are confident that both parties will respect their right to freely make their own decisions regarding union representation, and that the union and SCC can agree on a mechanism to do so,” Berera wrote.
[ad_2]
Source link
