Union Labor Disputes Canada Wal-Mart

Union Labor Disputes Canada Wal-Mart Canada This report is an evaluative report and summary about the international retail giant Wal-Mart. There is no better presentation than one that presents the varying opinions in legal philosophy between unions and employers. As of late, Wal-Mart has been trying to fend off multiple attacks by organized labor over the past decade in an attempt to maintain its union free managerial style.

"Union leaders say their chances for organizing Wal-Mart workers shot up this week when a federal judge in San Francisco said 1.6 million current and former employees could sue the retailer for sex discrimination in a class-action lawsuit." (Ramstack, 2004) The Wal-Mart situation covers a full spectrum of legal concerns such as the acquisition and termination of collective representation of employees, unfair labor practices and the associated regulations, collective bargaining schemes, the scope of individual's rights for collective bargaining and basic constitutional rights in a labor context.

A detailed evaluation of the existing turbulence at Wal-Mart will present an excellent opportunity for identifying and assessing whether existing Canadian labor statutes will be sufficient in meeting the objectives of both Wal-Mart and labor factions or if those regulations will need to be reconsidered. Wal-Mart Canada has been experiencing ongoing attempts by labor to organize the company's employees. Canadian legal statutes have come under some fire as well because the process of measuring how well a legal system is protecting employee rights is a difficult task.

The process of hiring and firing an employee has always been a concern in a retail operation such as Wal-Mart. Existing laws are of concern in these new rounds of labor negotiations. However, Canadian labor parties have contended for decades that the labor laws that govern a worker's right to belong to a union has always been in favor of the employer so they have been going directly after legislators in their effort to level the playing field so to speak.

Introduction This research document represents a full evaluative case study of the international retail giant Wal-Mart and their continued attempts to thwart organized labor efforts in Canada and the associated outcomes of existing Labor Review Board cases that have dealt with the retailer. This evaluative effort proved significant and therefore warranted additional investigation. ".. these results have important public policy implications.

Recent public policies are increasing economic integration in Europe and North America (by way of the North American Free Trade Agreement, for example), and there is clearly a need to understand the ramifications of this integration.

Since multinational organizations frequently assume increased prominence when such integration occurs, the results presented here constitute important evidence on the effect on labor relations of this increasing economic integration." (Budd, 1994) The detailed evaluation of the existing turbulence within the employee ranks of Wal-Mart presents an excellent opportunity to identify and assess existing Canadian labor statutes and their ability to meet the objectives of multinational organizations such as Wal-Mart.

This report therefore is presented in a format that first presents a history of the problems, issues and concerns regarding Wal-Mart including efforts to organize Canadian employees. From there, the research moves into an evaluation of some blatant shortcomings of certification, unfair labor practices and remedy provisions in existing Canadian labor legislation and efforts by Wal-Mart to utilize these shortcomings in there disputes.

The foundation for this report has it roots in the recent efforts of America's largest retailer Wal-Mart being put in the precarious position of fending off multiple attempts to organize their employees by organized labor movements in both the United States and Canada. An example of the trends for labor organization can be demonstrated by the June 2004 combined efforts of multiple organized labor factions planning and implementing multi-million dollar campaigns in an effort to organize Wal-Mart's existing and potential employees.

Wal-Mart Guilty Promoting and protecting workers' rights in multinational companies like Wal-Mart is often difficult. "When you're the world's biggest retailer, your size alone guarantees that virtually everyone has an opinion about you.

For Wal-Mart, those opinions range from awe and admiration to fear and loathing, especially among its competitors, which now include nearly every retailer in the United States and a growing number of companies overseas." (McTaggart, 2003) the basic operating procedures and employee rights concerns for large retail companies in the world have poor track records for established hiring and firing, pay scale and work programmes.

However, on May of 2003, the British Columbia Labour Relations Board ruled against a local Wal-Mart citing that the store's management team in Quesnel violated employee rights in regard to a complaint from union officials. "The United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) Local 1518 laid a complaint against Wal-Mart as a result of the company's blatant interference with its employees' right to join a union.

The Labour Relations Board found that Wal-Mart had violated the Labour Code which guarantees workers the right to decide free of intimidation and coercion to join, or not join, a union." (walmartworkerscanada, 2003) The Labour Relations Board at the time ordered Wal-Mart's management to hold a meeting for its employees in the store to literally read the Summary of Decision of the findings that Wal-Mart was in deed guilty of violating the Labor Code.

In addition, the Board also ruled that the union involved was to receive a thirty minute address for all employees' interested in hearing the recruitment pitch of the union officials as well. To add insult to injury, Wal-Mart was also required to post the verdict on the store's bulletin boards.

One union member was quoted as having said, "All we as a Union have ever asked is that Wal-Mart respect the law in British Columbia in the same manner we do and allow its employees to make a fair and informed decision as to whether they want to join our Union or not.

We are always prepared to accept the decision of the workers we attempt to organize and Wal-Mart should do the same." (walmartworkerscanada, 2003) the union official also was clear when he claimed that Wal-Mart practiced illegal behaviors on a regular basis.

"Wal-Mart keeps pleading publicly how much it respects its employee's legal rights, but virtually every time employees talk to a Union, which is their right under the law, Wal-Mart violates those rights." (walmartworkerscanada, 2003) Working conditions and employee rights In April of 2003, attorneys opened a sex discrimination suit against Wal-Mart on behalf of one and half million women who the plaintiffs claimed were only seen as 'housewives supplementing their income.' "The suit, filed by six women in June 2001, accuses Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, of paying women less than men for similar work and awarding promotions through an old boys' network that has kept women's numbers low.

Monday's motion sought to bring the statistics to life with declarations from 110 women in 30 states..." (walmartworkerscanada, 2003) Although these suits were filed in the United States, they could have international implications. Wal-Mart's legal team did not deny that there may have been some cases of discrimination but of those, they were individual cases based on the fact that the organization is so large. They were also clear to point out that in no way were there any organization wide conspiracies.

"Allen said the company conducted a study that showed men and women were paid substantially the same in 90% of the stores, and the proportion of women who won promotions was the same as the proportion who applied. He also said Wal-Mart is "an extremely decentralized company" that gives substantial autonomy to managers of its 3,400 stores." (walmartworkerscanada, 2003) The key to this matter was that "women made up 67% of the company's hourly workers in 2001 but only 35.7% of assistant managers, 14.3% of store managers and 9.8% of district managers, plaintiffs' lawyers said.

They said women earned about $1,100 a year less than men among hourly workers in 2001 and $14,500 less among management workers." (walmartworkerscanada, 2003) This large contingent of female employees was not organized via labor party or union agreement because Wal-Mart is basically a non-union supporting organization and only a few locations have been mandated for certification. This type of law suit would be guaranteed to bring attention to the Wal-Mart working and fair labor conditions as well as to the many other employee relations concerns such as organization via unions.

More attempts at organizing the often vocal and many times disgruntled Wal-Mart labor force may therefore be on the horizon. "In addition, the UFCW has spearheaded an organizing drive in Ontario, targeting the Wal-Mart store in Pickering.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board is currently inquiring into union allegations that Wal-Mart committed an unfair labor practice by dismissing an employee of the Pickering store, and taking reprisals against another, because of their involvement in the union's organizing campaign." (Labour Law News, 2004) Wal-Mart has been very instrumental at altering and possibly even establishing the working conditions of the entire nation of Canada. When a union wins certification in a Wal-Mart store anywhere in the world it will be big news.

But when it just recently occurred in 2004 at a store in Jonquiere, British Columbia, the reader must appreciate that a real battle had been won. The original efforts of that particular store for example had the local labor Commission reject certification by a margin of 74 to 65. When the union announced that it won the coveted certification at Quebec, it was quite a blow to the retailer.

The Quebec Labour Relations Commission issued the order certifying the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) as the bargaining agent of employees in Wal-Mart's store in Jonquiere. As noted, the reason a victory of this magnitude is huge is because of the policies and tactics used by Wal-Mart. The retailer works diligently to prevent its workforce from engaging in any collective action and they have consistently shown that they are willing to cross the line to guarantee their position.

Wal-Mart Canada's First Union In January of 1994, the discount department store operator Wal-Mart headed north from its base in the United States in an effort to expand their network into the Canadian retail market. The new arm of the retailer was labeled as Wal-Mart Canada and fell under the management of Wal-Mart International. They quickly acquired one hundred twenty two of a possible one hundred forty four stores from another retailer, Woolco.

At the time, Wal-Mart was already operating over twenty-five hundred stores globally but not a single one was unionized. To bring Wal-Mart's position on the union issue home, the stores that Wal-Mart purchased or acquired were not unionized but nine of the remaining stores that were already unionized were passed over. Wal-Mart simply did not purchase any of the nine. "On April 14, 1996, the United Steelworkers began an organizing drive at the Wal-Mart store in Windsor, Ontario.

When Andy Johnston, the store manager, became aware that employees were being approached to sign union cards, he immediately notified the "home office" in Toronto. It was decided that Tino Borean, the District Manager, would go to Windsor the next day." (Labour Law News, 1997) All employees of the Windsor Wal-Mart were ordered to be in to work early enough to attend a mandatory morning meeting in regard to the topic of unions. In a related story, the Canadian labor laws were in transition at around the same time.

"The statute that provides the collective bargaining framework for some 700,000 workers in the federally regulated private sector is slated for change. On November 4, 1996, the federal government introduced Bill C-66, an Act to Amend the Canada Labour Code.

The amendments were developed following the release in February of a report entitled "Seeking a Balance," issued by a task force made up of Chair Andrew Sims and members Paula Knopf and Rodrigue Blouin." (Harnden, 2004) Bill C-66 had a purpose of realigning the non-representational Canada Labour Relations Board with a new Canada Industrial Relations Board. The industrial board was composed of a neutral Chair and Vice-Chairs, as well as an equal number of members who were to represent both employers and employees.

The new process was intended to streamline administrative tasks and processes. Back at Wal-Mart, over the course of the next few days after that original meeting, the management team that was present in the store seemed to grow as higher ranking executives began appearing and the number of meetings increased proportionately. Meetings were repeatedly held by management for employees which included one-on-one meetings, team meetings and even after hour calls to the homes of the employees.

The message was overly clear -- Wal-Mart did not want a union in their new northern backyard. The obvious questions that arose at the time were related to Wal-Mart's employee policies and management's refusal to answer employees' questions regarding job security while the store's employees were in the process of considering the union drive as well as the efforts of the management team to do whatever was necessary to stop the organizational efforts of the United Steel Workers.

Wal-Mart's managers were literally circulating around the stores to privately discuss the union's efforts with employees and even sat in meetings that were clearly efforts for the union to gather support. Of course, existing Canadian Labor Laws did not permit such blatant efforts to keep an employee from attending or conversing about a unionization meeting while with management present. The Ontario Labour Relations Board concurred when the matter was brought to their attention via an application presented by the United Steel Workers.

The Board used the decision from Lorraine Products Canada Limited, [1977] OLRB Rep. Nov. 734. "The Board's ruling is in keeping with a long line of cases in which the Board has affirmed that it will not tolerate subtle threats to job security made by employers to thwart a union drive.

As in the K-Mart decision, the practice of flooding a workplace with outside managers during a union drive was recognized as a subtle, but effective, form of intimidation." (Labour Law News, 1997) Wal-Mart employee policies prior to Windsor were geared to promote a positive employee culture which functioned by incorporating employees efforts in a family or team approach.

"Employees, called "associates," are treated as partners, and are encouraged to make suggestions or ask questions." (Labour Law News, 1997) Windsor was the first of many demonstrations of Wal-Mart's obvious deviation from its own polices when the need arose. In other words, the company's culture of managerial and employee openness was their un-doing. "The company's practice of encouraging employees to ask questions and guaranteeing a management response within the same day fostered a sense of entitlement to information about the business.

Finally, the Board concluded that the union's support was adequate for certification. Vice-Chair Johnston noted that the union drive was highly successful prior to managerial intervention and had garnered the support of 44% of the employees. The subsequent plunge in support was the result of Wal-Mart's contravention of the Act." (Labour Law News, 1997) Windsor became Wal-Mart's first unionized store. Why No Unions for Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is a full fledged retail store operator that serves various markets through unique retail formats on a global scale.

The company is comprised of three main segments: Wal-Mart Stores SAM'S CLUB International The Wal-Mart Stores has unique retail sub-segments made up of Discount Stores, Supercenters and Neighborhood Markets with all of these formats housed within the boarders of the United States. The SAM'S CLUB brand is a membership only service of open warehouse clubs. As of January 31, 2004, Wal-Mart operated approximately thirty-five hundred combined Discount Stores, Supercenters, SAM'S CLUBs and Neighborhood Markets in the United States alone.

The International segment consists of Canada, United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Japan, China, South Korea, Mexico and Puerto Rico. "Outside of its U.S. operations, Wal-Mart is steadily and cautiously staking its claim in a number of international markets to help ensure long-term growth. So far, he results have been phenomenal. It now operates more than 1,000 units in nine countries, and sales approached $41 billon dais year. If Wal-Mart International were a separate company, it would be No.

33 on the Fortune 500." (McTaggart, 2003) The global operation is segmented as can be expected since this group serves diverse nationalities and markets. Thus, the International sector has many different formats of retail stores and restaurants. "Since 1994 Wal-Mart Canada has created more than 41,000 permanent positions and has added over 100 new store locations. This number is constantly increasing as we continue to expand." (Wal-Mart Canada, 2004) This also encompasses a number of the regular Discount Stores, Supercenters and SAM'S CLUBs all of which operate outside of the United States.

The international area also has a large share of the Seiyu, Ltd. A retailer in Japan. The organization sincerely believes that it is employee friendly. "Our people make the difference! "Our relationship with the Associates is a partnership in the truest sense. it's the only reason our company has been able to consistently outperform the competition - and even our own expectations." Sam Walton." (Wal-Mart Canada, 2004) the company traditionally credits its overall success on its human resources.

Whether this is actually the case or not seems irrelevant because the one thing the company has done for sure is that they have found a way to distinguish themselves from their competition. Wal-Mart is a company that has gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid the possibility of their Canadian labor force becoming unionized. Similar to the automobile industry, Wal-Mart will continue to lobby against unions and inherent supportive legislation. Consider the recent reevaluation of the automobile industry.

"Right-to-work status, non-union status continues to be a big attraction, particularly for foreign manufacturers." (Corbett, 2002) the automobile industry has begun to migrate away from the Midwest, North and parts of Canada to try to mimic retail giant Wal-Mart's 'union free' workforce. Automobile manufactures have begun moving to the southern regions of the United States in an attempt to reduce the number of unionized laborers from areas such as Quebec and Ontario.

"It's not unusual for about 30% of the workforce to be unionized in Midwestern and Northeastern states and Quebec and Ontario. In southern states, the average is 4% to 5%." (Corbett, 2002) Wal-Mart literally functions on a premise that unions represent adverse business conditions.

Union Free environments entail: Managerial Control No Strikes Higher Turnover and thus Reduced Pay Scales Less Negotiation Related to Employee Health Care Coverage Fewer Levels of Job Classifications Singular Employee Disputes as Opposed to Group Level Disputes No Arbitration Once a union has gone through whatever process it deems necessary to organize itself, the main objectives are to level the playing field between management and employees.

Of course, the main objective of a union is to obtain the legal right to negotiate for a contract with the employer and thus work to obtain a contract. Whether a craft, industrial or federation union, a negotiated contract usually incorporates some if not all of the responsibilities of the union, which include: labor relations, grievance management, performance management, training and development, job proficiency development, drug testing, discipline and discharge management, contractual and other employee rights management, health and security management, safety and OHSA management to name just a few.

However, that is exactly what a company like Wal-Mart is desperately working to avoid. "At the time of its application for certification, the union after a very brief campaign, enjoyed the support of forty-four percent of the bargaining unit. One week later as a result of the employer's contravention of the Act that support had plummeted to approximately twenty-one percent. However, as noted we are of the view that this drastic drop in support was not reflective of the true wishes of the employees.

Accordingly, we are of the view that the trade union has membership support adequate for the purpose of collective bargaining." In the result, the Board certified the United Steelworkers of America as the bargaining agent for the employees of the Windsor Wal-Mart, with the exception of management and temporary or fixed-term employees." (Labour Law News, 1997) Union Recruitment The union environment on both the national and the global scale has been gradually changing.

"After all, there's still a long way to go when just 14% of the national workforce belongs to a labor union, a figure that 20 years ago was around 24%." (Delsohn) Unions still currently play a role in the Canadian work place. but, in both the United States and Canada, union enrollment continues to drop. "By 1999, union representation in those sectors had fallen to 15.6% and 19.1%, respectively.

In 1999, the percentage of the nation's workforce belonging to a union remained at 13.9% -- the same as the year before and the lowest level on record since 1977." (Unions) Recent economic downturns continue to erode the strength of labor unions because lay-offs in affect reduce the numbers of dues-paying union members and the unions throughout the American continent have consistently had difficulties replacing lost members once there are economic rebounds. "It's not as if unions gain during good times and lose during bad ones," says Clark University labor expert Gary Chaison.

"They lose during prosperity and they lose during recession." (Unions) It has become more obvious that organized labor movements are no longer as dominating a force in this new global economy as they used to be. Basically, only public employees and teachers throughout the United States and Canada have an overall percentage of labor represented by unions as other industries such as the airline industry, automobile and other manufacturing industries union headcounts continue to plummet.

In this ever competitive global economy, manufactures of all kinds search for new opportunities to reduce costs and systematically increase their revenue and market share. Reducing labor worked in the early 1990's so layoffs, downsizing and corporate re-structuring helped shed the burden of labor related costs. In twenty-first century, manufacturing and retail are working with labor already at a premium as just-in-time philosophies reduce the need for labor resources and warehousing needs.

Globalization and communications have helped eliminate the middle man and as the internet continues to thrive in a tax free shelter period, brick and mortar needs will continue to become irrelevant as online stores are perfected. Technology will continue to automate processes further reducing the human resource needs by companies working with Six Sigma and other efficiency methodologies. This all should be good for unions - but, it is not. All of these managerial pleasures equate to a nightmare for union recruitment efforts.

The issue that labor unions face today is that the world is getting smaller due to continued globalization trends. Of course, unions are not the same the world over. The trend of negative enrollment in unions around the world has been following America's example. In China, union membership has been declining because of the Chinese government's attempts at manipulating statues governing union membership and economic reform throughout Asia has transformed the relationships of state and business and between management and labor.

"The actual roles that trade union cadres play in enterprises are more important than the number of trade union cadres." (Baek) Even union haven nations like Germany, England and France report union membership is on a decline. Throughout the European states such as Sweden, Germany, England and France, union leadership is trying to reinvent themselves as declining membership threatens their very existence. In Europe, unions have been associated with the negative trade imbalances suffered by the industrialized nations.

The significance of the drop in union enrollment is thought to be a major contributing reason why America's largest retailer Wal-Mart has been put in the position of fending off the many attempts at organizing their employees. Unions are recruiting for survival and Wal-Mart offers a feeding frenzy of employee issues and dismay for the unions to target their recruitment efforts. These desperate times for the Canadian unions has literally motivated direct attacks on the haves such as Wal-Mart.

No Longer Need Intimidation - Wal-Mart Bill The 1997 Labor Board review of the United Steel Worker's effort to unionize the Windsor Wal-Mart store clearly showed intimidation tactics being used by Wal-Mart's management. "Vice-Chair Janice Johnston, writing for the majority, held that in several instances, Wal-Mart's conduct breached section 70 of the Act. Relying on Viceroy Construction Company Limited, [1977] OLRB Rep.

September 562, she noted that, although an employer is free to express its views about representation by a union, it cannot use that freedom of expression to make overt or subtle threats related to employment conditions or job security. The Board held that in several instances the conduct of Wal-Mart's managers had crossed that line." (Labour Law News, 1997) in Wal-Mart's attempt to stop the Windsor union recruiting efforts, they violated their own company policy precedence by not responding to employees' questions about the impact of unionization.

The silence had an underlying message that was meant to imply a store closure. The practices utilized by Wal-Mart demonstrated how an employer's manipulations and outright illegal misconduct could offer an opportunity for Canadian and international corporations to circumvent the purpose of labor legislation. Although these tactics did not work in Windsor, Ontario, there are many other instances where employers have successfully defeated the efforts of labor unions from organizing Canadian employees. Of course, Wal-Mart did learn from its mistakes. The company no longer strong armed employees.

They moved to the source of the problem. Wal-Mart moved to have legislation instituted that would reduce the power of Ontario's Labor Relations Board. "On June 29, 1998, Bill 31, the Economic Development and Workplace Democracy Act, became law." (Harnden, 2004) the Bill received nicknames like the 'Ontario Bill' and the 'Wal-Mart Bill' because it was a direct affront to the power of the governmental labor powers of Ontario and set precedence throughout Canada.

The Bill became infamous because of its repeal of the before mentioned Ontario Labour Relations Board's authority to certifying unions, in particular the certification of the union for the Windsor Wal-Mart. "Section 11, the provision in question, provided that the Board could certify the union if it was of the view that employer misconduct was such that the true wishes of employees would not be reflected in a representation vote." (Harnden, 2004) Wal-Mart successfully reduced the chance of a repeat of the Windsor situation by limiting the Boards authority.

"Now, the Board's remedial power in the case of employer or union misconduct will be restricted to ordering a new representation vote.

As well, it will have the power to "do anything to ensure that a new representation vote ordered under this section reflects the true wishes of the employees in the bargaining unit." The removal of the Board's powers applies retroactively to any application made to it before the amendments came into force." (Harnden, 2004) The new provision utilized the 'Certification Vote Thresholds' which was a subsection of the Labour Relations Act.

Thus, any union seeking certification would from that point forward demonstrate that a minimum of forty percent of a companies or stores employees concurred with the vote to add in a union as well as the very difficult task of the union getting concurrence from the employer. The employer agreement clause thru provision, s. 8.1, gave Wal-Mart and other non-union businesses the right to question any union's bargaining unit estimates prior to their receiving a charter.

Wal-Mart's antics are consistently used throughout Canada today to bring doubt on the Labor Board's authority for example, in the 2002 Polar Foods International Inc. V.P.E.I. Labour Relations Board, Ufcw Local 864, "During late 1999 and early 2000, an attempt was made to unionize employees at a fish processing plant operated by Polar Foods International Inc. In Summerside, P.E.I.

Polar opposed the unionization drive, spearheaded by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, and as a result the union and five individuals filed an unfair labor practice complaint with the provincial Labour Relations Board.

This decision will no doubt be examined very carefully in those jurisdictions where a specific "remedial certification" provision is not included in labor relations legislation or where, as in Ontario, following the Board's remedial certification in the Wal-Mart case, it was repealed." (Labour Law News 2002) No Union No power As unions are in a battle for a renewed interest in their movement, it is apparent that the twenty-first century Canadian labor legislation may be in need of some rethinking to assure and protect union efforts and employee rights from conglomerates such as Wal-Mart.

As unions are in a position of weakness as they rebuild their ranks, corporate scandal and renewed legal power has inherently blocked those union efforts to rebuild. The new economic demands on corporate America have lead to a large number of misconducts that have far surpassed recent union illegalities. When the market place has become virtually union free then employees suffer at the hands of the corporate structure in regard to dispute settlement.

Through a review and investigation of previous documented attempts and cases of Canadian employers' attempting to manipulate existing and past labor legislation, we can see that the Canadian Business.