NEW DELHI: The United Auto Employees (UAW) has accused Mercedes of interfering with a union election at two factories in Alabama by intimidating and coercing staff to vote in opposition to unionization.
The labor group filed an objection with the Nationwide Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in search of a brand new vote, alleging that the corporate engaged in an “illegal antiunion marketing campaign” that included self-discipline, captive viewers conferences, and a normal purpose of coercing and intimidating workers.
Nevertheless, regardless of the alleged unlawful anti-union marketing campaign, over 2,000 Mercedes staff voted in favor of unionization.
The UAW believes that in a good election, the place Mercedes is held accountable for following the legislation, staff will efficiently unionize. The employees sought a good alternative to have a voice on the job and a say of their working situations.
Mercedes-Benz said that greater than 90% of staff members participated within the election, with a majority indicating they aren’t thinking about UAW illustration for collective bargaining functions. The corporate claims to have labored with the NLRB to stick to pointers all through the election course of and can proceed to take action.
The union’s submitting alleges that 4 pro-union workers have been fired, and the corporate allowed anti-union workers to solicit assist throughout work hours whereas prohibiting pro-union workers from doing the identical. The corporate additionally required staff to attend anti-union conferences, displayed anti-union propaganda, and prohibited the distribution of union supplies in non-work areas.
Moreover, the union claims that the corporate, or its representatives, polled staff about union assist, advised that voting for the union could be futile, focused union supporters with drug checks, and “engaged in conduct which intentionally sought to exacerbate racial emotions by irrelevant and inflammatory appeals to racial prejudice.”
The NLRB will overview the objections, and whether it is decided that the employer’s conduct affected the election, a brand new election might be ordered.
The labor group filed an objection with the Nationwide Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in search of a brand new vote, alleging that the corporate engaged in an “illegal antiunion marketing campaign” that included self-discipline, captive viewers conferences, and a normal purpose of coercing and intimidating workers.
Nevertheless, regardless of the alleged unlawful anti-union marketing campaign, over 2,000 Mercedes staff voted in favor of unionization.
The UAW believes that in a good election, the place Mercedes is held accountable for following the legislation, staff will efficiently unionize. The employees sought a good alternative to have a voice on the job and a say of their working situations.
Mercedes-Benz said that greater than 90% of staff members participated within the election, with a majority indicating they aren’t thinking about UAW illustration for collective bargaining functions. The corporate claims to have labored with the NLRB to stick to pointers all through the election course of and can proceed to take action.
The union’s submitting alleges that 4 pro-union workers have been fired, and the corporate allowed anti-union workers to solicit assist throughout work hours whereas prohibiting pro-union workers from doing the identical. The corporate additionally required staff to attend anti-union conferences, displayed anti-union propaganda, and prohibited the distribution of union supplies in non-work areas.
Moreover, the union claims that the corporate, or its representatives, polled staff about union assist, advised that voting for the union could be futile, focused union supporters with drug checks, and “engaged in conduct which intentionally sought to exacerbate racial emotions by irrelevant and inflammatory appeals to racial prejudice.”
The NLRB will overview the objections, and whether it is decided that the employer’s conduct affected the election, a brand new election might be ordered.
