NLRB Certifies Union Despite Immigration-Related Objections by Employer

IMMIGRANTS & EMPLOYMENT

Immigrants' Employment Rights and Remedies

NLRB CERTIFIES UNION DESPITE IMMIGRATION-RELATED OBJECTIONS BY EMPLOYER
Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 15, No. 6, Oct. 8, 2001

In certifying Local 1027 of the Chicago and Northeast Illinois District Council of Carpenters as the collective bargaining representative of workers at Superior Truss and Panel, Inc., the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) adopted the hearing officer's recommendations rejecting three objections raised by the employer against the election after a majority of the workers voted for the union on Feb. 21, 2001. The newly unionized workers include a number of immigrants.

The employer had alleged that some of the workers who voted in the election were undocumented, pointing as evidence to "no-match letters" it had received from the Social Security Administration (SSA), each informing the employer that the Social Security numbers submitted by the workers named in the letter did not match valid SSA accounts. However, the NLRB noted that the employer had received several no-match letters starting as early as May 1999, yet this was the first time the employer had raised any questions regarding workers' immigration status. Moreover, the employer had submitted the workers' names to the NLRB on its list of all its employees who were eligible to vote in the union election. Finding that the employer had not submitted any evidence to substantiate that any of the workers were indeed undocumented, the NLRB rejected the employer's argument.

The employer also argued that the union had unfairly interfered with the election by having an attorney present during one of the union-sponsored campaign meetings. At this meeting, the attorney apparently explained to workers who were complaining of national origin discrimination by a supervisor that they should document these problems in case they decided to file a lawsuit after the election. The employer also took issue with a letter the attorney wrote to the employer after the election objecting to the employer's threats to discharge workers about whom the employer had received a no-match letter from the SSA in June 2000. The NLRB held that there was no evidence that the attorney promised to or actually filed a lawsuit before the election. On the other hand, the attorney's letter to the employer clearly demonstrated the union's intent to file a charge of an unfair labor practice because the employer threatened to fire those workers who appeared on an old no-match letter, and the NLRB stated that filing such charges against an employer during an organizing campaign is permissible because it is necessary to preserve the electoral process.

Finally, the NLRB rejected the employer's third argument, in which he challenged the election ballots because they were only in English, though there were Spanish translations of the notice of election with sample ballots in Spanish. The NLRB held that translating the notice was sufficient and that the translation only had to be understandable, not flawless, to pass muster.

Superior Truss & Panel, Inc. and Chicago & Northeast Illinois Dist. Council of Carpenters, AFL-CIO, Local Union 1027, Case 13-RC-20518, 334 NLRB No. 115, 2001 NLRB LEXIS 559, Aug. 2, 2001.