| TOP STORIES AROUND THE COUNTY |
No Date for Sweet Brook Union ElectionBy Tammy Daniels
iBerkshires Staff
09:14AM / Tuesday, March 31, 2009
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — It's unlikely that the blocked union vote at Sweet Brook Care Centers will be rescheduled until the National Labor Relations Board completes its investigation into complaints against the nursing homes' management, said union officials.
"They've postponed it. I think what's significant about that is there are many different elections where there are charges but [the elections] still go forward," said 1199SEIU Executive Vice President Michael Fadel last week. "In a small number of cases, the board makes a decision not to ... that there can only be a free and untainted election, pending the resolution of those complaints."
Workers at Sweet Brook were to vote on whether to organize and join 1199 Service Employees International Union last Thursday. The union's lawyers, however, requested in a hand-delivered letter to Labor Board Regional Director Rosemary Pye last Monday that the election be halted because "[the employer] has destroyed any possibility of employees making a free choice in the election."
The board normally expedites complaints related to blocking elections, but is unclear how fast that would happen.
At issue are allegations that parent corporatioon Northern Berkshire Healthcare and Sweet Brook management have intimidated workers and blocked efforts to disseminate union materials.
An internal e-mail from Nothern Berkshire Healthcare's Vice President of Human Resources Arthur Scott discussing how the health system responds to unfair labor complaints infuriated union officials.
Scott wrote to the executive team that he believed there was a legitimate defense to decisions made by the health care system and that "because the NLRB process is so lengthy and the potential penalties so minor, I think we should continue with our current practice."
The e-mail does not state what that practice is, but rather explains the Labor Board's decision-making process. Essentially, any ruling against the health system would carry no significant penalties. Fadel called the e-mail "pretty shocking and cavalier."
Health care system officials have stated their primary concern is making sure every employee is fully informed before casting a vote.
"We're very confident that our managers have acted legally and appropriately," said Vice President of External Affairs Dianne Cutillo last week.
SEIU filed a flurry of unfair labor complaints with the Labor Board within days of Scott's e-mail surfacing; an earlier complaint dated Feb. 27 claims the organizers were not allowed to distribute or post union materials. NBH, meanwhile, has appealed an earlier ruling by the Labor Board's Region 1 over which workers are qualified to vote.
Fadel said the vote was delayed but the organizing committee was "very active." "From our perspective, they are a union, they are working together to want to make conditins better at the home." |
Your Comments
iBerkshires.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue. Name-calling, personal attacks, libel, slander or foul language is not allowed. All comments are reviewed before posting and will be deleted or edited as necessary. Comments are closed for this article. If you would like to contribute information on this article, e-mail us at info@iBerkshires.com |
i hope that the union gets in at sweetbrook. It is obvious that the managament there is not concerned about anything but themselves.
The exact reason why the employees went looking for the union in the first place! | | from: pro union | on: 03-31-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
Pro Union says it is obvious that "…’managament’ is interested in no one but themselves.” Pro Union thinks like a sheep and spells like one too.
You can let the union tell you what to think, or you could actually read this article and learn some FACTS for a change. For example, "The e-mail does not state what that practice is, but rather explains the Labor Board's decision-making process.” Is it really ‘shocking and cavalier’ to explain how the union’s complaint will be handled? | | from: Pro Truth | on: 03-31-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
| The sad part of this whole story is whether or not you are for the union or against or don't have an opinion, the workers should have been left to make there own decisions and this would have been decided by the vote but sinster practice has halted that and that is a shame.... | | from: lisa | on: 04-05-2009 12:00AM
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0) |
|
|
Advertise on iBerkshires.com
|
