Wal-Mart Stores Inc.’s charge of illegal picketing by workers at some of its stores probably won’t be resolved by the National Labor Relations Board before the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday tomorrow, the agency said.
Absent an NLRB move to bar the protests, groups including the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union would be free to proceed with demonstrations at hundreds of Wal-Mart stores in the U.S. during at least part of the holiday weekend.
The complaint, filed Nov. 16 against the UFCW, is being investigated by staff from several regions who are interviewing witnesses and reviewing company documents, Nancy Cleeland, a labor board spokeswoman, said yesterday in an e-mail. The board’s Division of Advice will make a final determination.
“There are many distinct factual circumstances at stores across the country to consider,” Cleeland said. “Under these circumstances, the Office of General Counsel does not expect to make a decision before Thursday on whether or not to seek an injunction to stop the activity.”
The union, representing more than 1.3 million workers in grocery and retail stores and the meatpacking industry, said Wal-Mart workers began walking off the job Nov. 14 at stores and warehouses in California.
The strikes are the first of what the group said are 1,000 protests planned in Chicago, Dallas, Miami, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Milwaukee, Los Angeles, Minnesota and Washington ahead of “Black Friday” on Nov. 23, the day after the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday and traditionally a major shopping day.
Wal-Mart has accused the UFCW of violating federal labor laws by inappropriately picketing, demonstrating, trespassing on company property and intimidating customers and employees -- or making threats to do those things. The union has tried to force Wal-Mart to the bargaining table even though it doesn’t officially represent employees, according to Wal-Mart’s filing. The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer asked the board for an investigation and immediate injunction.
If the board rules in Wal-Mart’s favor, it would seek an injunction in district court to stop the protests. The agency and U.S. courts are closed tomorrow for Thanksgiving, meaning action could be delayed until at least Nov. 23.
“By law, under the National Labor Relations Act, this kind of charge has to take priority over every other thing we have going on,” Cleeland said in a Nov. 19 interview. “We are putting extra resources into this and trying to come to a decision as quickly as possible.”
Wal-Mart appreciates the “urgency demonstrated by the NLRB in undertaking its review,” Dan Fogelman, a company spokesman, said yesterday in an e-mailed statement.
“We understand that the multi-state, multi-faceted nature of the union’s conduct and the Board’s desire to perform a thorough review of the facts means that a decision will take a bit more time,” Fogelman said. “We have focused all of our attention on making the kickoff to the Christmas shopping season successful for our customers and associates.”
UFCW representatives didn’t reply to an e-mail seeking comment yesterday. Jill Cashen, a union spokeswoman, said on Nov. 19 that the group welcomes expedited consideration by the labor board.
“We feel confident that the board will deny Wal-Mart’s request to silence the UFCW and our allies,” she said in a phone interview.
Workers are protesting what the union said was Wal-Mart’s manipulation of hours and benefits, efforts to keep people from working full time and discrimination against women and minorities.
OUR Walmart, one of the groups organizing the protests, said in an e-mailed statement it had filed its own charge with the labor board yesterday. The group, which calls itself an organization of Wal-Mart employees, says the retailer’s managers sought to use threats to deter workers from participating in the demonstrations.
“I want to send a clear message to Walmart: we will not be silenced,” Mary Pat Tifft, an OUR Walmart member and 24-year Wal-Mart associate from Kenosha, Wisconsin, said in the statement.
Labor board staff have taken affidavits from witnesses, reviewed documents provided by Wal-Mart and obtained a response and evidence from the union.
“The legal issues - including questions about what constitutes picketing and whether the activity was aimed at gaining recognition for the union - are complex,” Cleeland said.