KNSI) – Workers with the United Security Professionals Local 2 Union say G4S security solutions company told them they have reached an impasse in contract negotiations with the union and have no interest in coming back to the bargaining table. The main sticking point is a change to their health benefits package. The union says they want to work out an agreement, but according to workers there, G4S is refusing to come back to the table.
The security contractor at Xcel Energy’s Monticello nuclear power plant appears set to lock out some guards after a breakdown in contract negotiations.
The lockout would affect “lieutenants “ or “shift leaders,” whose contract expires at midnight Saturday, said Josh Haider, head of United Security Professionals Local 2. There are about 25 unionized lieutenants at the Monticello plant employed by G4S, a large global security firm.
G4S and Xcel have been training replacements for union guards over the past month, Haider said.
Union busting is a pejorative term used by media, labor organizations, and others worldwide to describe a wide range of activities undertaken by employers, their proxies, and governments, which attempt to disrupt or prevent the formation or expansion of trade unions. The term “union busting” is used in current vernacular to describe activities in labor relations that do not favor unions. Union busting tactics can range from legal to illegal and subtle to violent. Labor laws exist country to country differing greatly in level and type of regulation or protection of unions, organizing, and other aspects of labor relations. These can affect such topics as posting notices/communications, organizing inside or outside employer property, solicitations, card signing, union dues, picketing, work stoppages, striking, strikebreaking, lockouts, dismissals or termination of employment, permanent replacements, automatic recognition, derecognition, ballot elections, employer-controlled trade unions and more. Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that everyone has a right to form and/or join a trade union.
WHAT IS Union Busting?
Union-busting is a practice that is undertaken by an employer or their agents to prevent employees from joining a labor union, or to disempower, subvert, or destroy unions that already exist.
Union busting is a field populated by bullies and built on deceit. A campaign against a union is an assault on individuals and a war on truth. As such, it is a war without honor. The only way to bust a union is to lie, distort, manipulate, threaten, and always, always attack.
Martin Jay Levitt, 1993, Confessions of a Union Buster
PERSUADER RULE MOVES TO OMB: The Labor Department sent its long-delayed “persuader rule” to the Office of Management and Budget, according to several people familiar with the matter, including a senior administration official.
Story Continued Below
A key provision in the final rule would narrow the range of union-busting activities exempt from public disclosure under the Labor Department’s “advice exception.” Management-side attorneys who don’t deal directly with workers often use this exception, citing attorney-client privilege, to keep their anti-union activities under wraps.
But the Labor Department concluded in 2011 that its “advice exception” might be overbroad, noting that “the consultant may have devised and orchestrated certain, or even all, aspects of activities with a direct or indirect object to persuade employees about their rights to organize and bargain collectively.” OMB review is a key prerequisite for finalizing the rule. In its unified agenda released last month, the Labor Department said it hoped to finalize the regulation by March.
After years in regulatory limbo, the Department of Labor’s final revisions to the so-called “persuader” rule have moved one step closer to publication. On December 7, the DOL’s Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) submitted the final rule to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is the final step before the rule can be published in the Federal Register. Although the DOL’s regulatory agenda had estimated this rule would be published in March 2016, given the OMB’s traditional review timetable, the measure could be released even earlier in 2016. If the final rule resembles the proposal issued in 2011, it will have a significant impact on employers.