Despite all the regulatory protections provided by pro-labor Washington administration and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Service Employee’s International Union (SEIU) still managed to take things too far. The SEIU is known for its aggressive tactics and has practiced a scorched earth strategy against targeted employers for over a decade with its “Justice for Janitors” campaign.
In a case out of Texas, a Houston Janitorial service company sued the SEIU. The SEIU tried to force the company to sign a neutrality agreement as an initial step toward organizing that company. They also targeted the workers of five other building services companies that were similarly forced into neutrality agreements in the Houston area. The SEIU recruited the company’s employees to file wage and hour claims against their employer; filed multiple unfair labor practice claims with the now pro-labor NLRB; and attempted to defame the company through the publication of fliers, letters, and website postings. They protested stating that the company had violated numerous employment laws when in fact only one of many claims actually stood up to review with the agencies they were brought to.
As a result of these claims, the SEIU caused at least twelve of the company’s customers and suppliers to stop doing business with the company. In one case protesters entered the customer’s building and occupied her conference rooms to protest her relationship with the company.
Having had enough of this union bullying, the company sued SEIU Local 5 in 2007 stating its thuggish tactics caused it to lose business. For nine years the SEIU used every tactic it had to stall the litigation. This delayed the trial almost 10 years until August, 2016. After a four week trial the jury found the SEIU had engaged in a reckless disregard for truth in its communications inciting workers and other parties against the company. Through union e-mails it was found that the union’s goal was to force the company to lose enough business that it would lose its market or capitulate to the union.
This win against the SEIU was a first in many ways. The Fisher Phillips Newsletter reports that this win was the first time in American labor history that a jury found against a union for defamation and disparagement during organizing. This was the first time any SEIU local was forced to defend its organizing actions to a jury. It was also the first time a labor union was found liable for defamation or disparagement while conducting organizing operations.
What were the damages? The judgement against the SEIU local was for over $5million. The award is for lost business and does not include punitive damages or pre-judgement interest that could push this award up another $2.5 million if successful.
Of course, the SEIU will appeal.
Fisher Phillips points out that employers that find themselves in an aggressive organizing campaign with a union should follow what this employer did and challenge untrue statements, complaints or charges initiated by the union during the campaign. In this case, the employer successfully defeated over twenty complaints the union brought on behalf of workers losing only one small wage and hour claim. It is further recommended the employer set up a war chest that it can use against the union’s goal of depleting the employer’s resources through lost business, litigation and of course the on-going distraction associated with managing this war. It is recommended a contingency plan be developed to respond to work disruptions and aggressive union PR. Check your company e-mails for communications between union representatives and workers that can demonstrate a union’s tortuous tactics and allegedly illegal activities.
The employer’s victory was also helped by the SEIU itself. At trial the employer brought out the SEIU’s “Contract Campaign Manual” that outlined all the SEIU’s nefarious tactics such as persuading workers to “disobey laws” and threaten the employer with accusations of racism and sexism.
In today’s pro-labor political environment, businesses need to be prepared not only for the negligent breach of employment law or regulations but also the structured and planned complaints and charges of an aggressive labor organization.
Source: Fisher Phillips Newsletter Employer Wins $5 Million from Bullying Union. 10/3/2016