Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Union says protest against Rochester hotel will continue (18 fired illegally says NLRB)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-17-07 04:53 PM
Original message
Union says protest against Rochester hotel will continue (18 fired illegally says NLRB)

http://news.postbulletin.com/newsmanager/templates/localnews_story.asp?z=2&a=287645

Union says protest against Rochester hotel will continue

3/16/2007 9:53:53 AM

By Matthew Stolle

The Post-Bulletin

The battle is not over.

Union leaders for Local 21 hailed the National Labor Relations Board's decision affirming the union's position that the firing of 18 workers at the Holiday Inn Express was a violation of federal labor law. But while calling it a "good first step," union leaders vowed to continue fighting and promised an escalating campaign of protest against the Rochester hotel until their demands are met.

"By no means is this really the end of it," said Dave Blanchard, Local 21's business manager, at a news conference Wednesday. "It has never in our opinion been so much about the legal issues as much as about the moral issues of how do we treat workers in our community and what is the right standard for workers to be treated."

Labor leaders said their conditions for an acceptable resolution to the dispute include an opportunity for the 18 dismissed housekeepers, housemen and maintenance workers to return to their old jobs, full back pay and the union's right to negotiate a "fair and just" contract with the hotel.

They also demanded that Michael Bhatka, the hotel's new general manager, issue a formal apology to the workers and the community.

Greg Griffiths, the attorney representing CMPJ Enterprises LLC, the Texas-based company that bought the Holiday Inn Express last December, said he hadn't had an opportunity to review much of the labor board's information on which it based its decision. But he maintained that the facts don't support the agency's conclusions.

"My client really hasn't had the opportunity to present a case," Griffiths said. "All that's happened so far is the NLRB has gathered information and made some preliminary analysis of that. We're hopeful that we will have the opportunity to present a complete case."

The hotel's alleged refusal to hire the 18 workers, several of whom had worked at the hotel for a decade or more, has had something of a galvanizing effect on Local 21, which has organized almost daily pickets outside the downtown hotel. They also successfully enlisted the Rochester City Council's support by persuading it to pass a resolution encouraging "current and new employers ... to be good corporate citizens."

At Wednesday's news conference at Local 21's headquarters, local leaders spoke in front of a stack of several hundred postcards signed by Rochester residents expressing support for the 18 workers. Most of the 18 workers have found employment with Sunstone Hotel Properties, the firm that owned the Holiday Inn Express before it was sold to CMPJ Enterprises LLC.

The labor relations board's determination that the new owners of the Holiday Inn Express violated federal labor law followed a two-month investigation by the board. The agency's decision means that the National Labor Relations Board is prepared to take its case against the Holiday Express' owners before an administrative law judge, barring some kind of settlement.

"We think it's a triable case, that we would prevail, and right now we're working on a settlement," Bob Chester, regional director of the board's Minneapolis office, said after the decision was made public.

Chester was unable to say how long his agency would pursue the possibility of negotiated settlement before filing a formal complaint against CMPJ. He said there is no firm deadline.

"We're waiting to get a feel for (the situation)," Chester said.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC