Retail giant Wal-Mart Stores Inc. could be facing substantial back pay fines and other remedies related to a federal complaint alleging it violated its employees’ rights with its response to organized strikes in 14 states that called for higher wages and other worker benefits.
The National Labor Relations Board consolidated complaint alleged that Wal-Mart violated the National Labor Relations Act by unlawfully threatening workers with reprisal for engaging in strikes over the last two years and for unlawfully disciplining or terminating some employees in anticipation of or response to activities related to the strikes and protests. The complaint lists more than 60 employees, including 19 who say they were discharged allegedly for participating in concerted activities.
Wal-Mart did not respond to requests for comment.
NLRB Complaint
The NLRB Office of the General Counsel said it informed the retailer that complaints were authorized in November 2013, but waited to officially file to see if a settlement could be reached. Those settlement discussions were unsuccessful, according to the regulatory body, and a complaint naming dozens of Wal-Mart supervisors and one corporate officer was filed on Jan. 15. Wal-Mart has until Jan. 28 to answer the complaint. The matter will then go before an administrative law judge, but a hearing date has not yet been set.
The NLRB complaint consolidated five cases filed by the union-backed OUR Wal-Mart worker advocate group against the retailer between November 2012 and September 2013. According to documents from NLRB, the complaints referenced events in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Washington.
Workers’ rights advocates said this is the largest complaint ever filed against the retail giant. Wal-Mart has faced a growing number of lawsuits over its employment practices in recent years, but has steadfastly defended its treatment of all its workers as fair and legal.
Background
The NLRB claims are related to a coordinated series of strikes organized by the OUR Walmart group over last two years. OUR Walmart has put low wages at the center of its campaign against the retail chain, claiming that most of Wal-Mart’s 1.3 million employees earn less than $25,000 a year, which puts them below the federal poverty line.
Workers’ groups have focused in recent years on organizing a series of national strikes leading up to Black Friday, considered the busiest shopping day of the year for many retailers. In 2013, the strikes started in Los Angeles in early November and spread to stores across the country in the weeks following. The effort culminated in the Black Friday events.
OUR Walmart filed a series of claims with the NLRB in advance of many of its organized events alleging that Wal-Mart was threatening employees who planned to participate in the protests and strikes. Following the events, the group claimed workers were also retaliated against, including some firings, and filed additional claims with the NLRB.
The claims in the NLRB case include charges that a Wal-Mart spokesperson made nonspecific threats against workers who were involved in the strikes during a televised interview about the organized protests, as well as several specific allegations that particular employees were fired for their involvement in the Black Friday protests and strikes.
NLRA
The NLRA protects employees from being discharged or otherwise discriminated against for: engaging in protected concerted activities, filing charges with the NLRB or giving testimony against their employers (NLRA §8(a)(4)).
Protected activity under the NLRA generally involves anything related to unionizing or concerted, that is group, activity related to the terms or conditions of workers employment; for example, work hours.
Concerted activity is usually two or more employees acting together, such as would be seen during a walkout or petition drive, or when an employee acts on the behalf of other employees through activities such as writing a letter of complaint on their behalf.
To read the complete story on Thompson’s HR Compliance Expert, click here.