Not everyone can do everything. But everyone can do something. Today I forced my arthritic hands to type the following complaint letter against some of the anti-union !@$@%@ that plague our fair nation's work places.
I cannot exaggerate how important it is to the progressive movement, and to those who still care, to the Democratic Party itself, that the labor movement survives and thrives.
The following letter invokes a little-enforced but important law that forces anti-union activity into the sunlight. I'm going to clean it up a little, insert some links, and send it today.
Hopefully my next diary will be about how important it is that the Volkswagen workers voted union.
Federal Department of Labor
Office of Labor-Management Standards
I am writing to inquire of the following entities have filed the reports required under the Landrum-Griffin Act to document their anti-union activity, including the financing. If these entities have not filed the required reports, I request that DOL open an investigation.
As you know, companies that undertake to interfere, restrain, coerce, and persuade their workers regarding choices regarding union representation are required to file am LM-10 report for certain of their activities.
I have reviewed your on-line list of reporting employers and did not see Wal-Mart on the list. Many unfair NLRB charges have been filed against Wal-Mart for interfering, restraining, and coercing their workers to refrain from pro-union activity.
Many articles have described how Wal-Mart has a large contingent of management employees who speed to the site of any store featuring union activity to persuade workers against unionization. New Wal-Mart hires must endure lengthy propaganda speeches and videos that disparage unions.
I have written many articles about this portion of the Landrum-Griffin Act. I was a researcher regarding these reporting requirements for former Congress Member William Clay, and testified before the Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations in 1984 about the Department of Labor’s failure to enforce these provisions.
I congratulate the DOL on its efforts in recent years to require reporting of these activities. In my opinion Wal-Mart should be filing LM-10 reports regarding its activities.
I am also inquiring about “Southern Momentum,” an anti-union group that seeks to persuade Volkswagen workers in Tennessee to vote against unionization. This group has produced several slick videos and published large newspaper ads so they apparently have considerable funding. I suspect they have hidden sponsors who are financing their operations. This is exactly the type of activity that the Landrum-Griffin reporting requirements are designed to expose.
Please review whether this group’s “persuasive” activities should be subject to LM 20 and LM 21 reporting requirements.
My final inquiry is about “Persuasive Communications” a consultant firm who defeated the UFCW’s efforts to organize Bed, Bath and Beyond in New Jersey. While BB&B filed an LM-10 report for 2012 listed $854,000 in payment to Persuasive, this consultant did not file a corresponding LM 20 and 21 report for the New Jersey activities. In fact this consultant did not file any LM reports for that entire year of 2012, according to my review of on-line records.
Please investigate whether “Persuasive” is obligated to file additional LM reports for current and recent years, including the BB&B campaign.
CC: UAW, UFCW
5:59 PM PT: I just read the Grover Norquist has paid for anti-union billboards in Tennessee, so I'll be changing the letter to include his activities, also.