After US Supreme Court win, company beats claim that suing union violated law

TAIHEIYO CEMENT

28/12/2023 21:26

* 
      Lawsuit over strike was not baseless or retaliatory, ALJ
rules
    

        * 
      U.S. Supreme Court revived lawsuit earlier this year
    

        * 
      Company says it had to toss out concrete because of strike
    

  
    By Daniel Wiessner
       Dec 28 (Reuters) - A concrete company did not violate
federal labor law by filing a lawsuit that was recently revived
by the U.S. Supreme Court accusing a union of destroying its
property during a strike, a National Labor Relations Board judge
has ruled.
    Administrative Law Judge Jeffrey Wedekind in a ruling
released on Thursday said Glacier Northwest Inc's 2017 lawsuit
was not frivolous and there was no proof the company sued an
International Brotherhood of Teamsters affiliate in retaliation
for the strike.
    The Supreme Court revived Glacier's lawsuit in June, saying
Washington's top state court was wrong to rule that it was
preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Glacier
says a brief strike by truck drivers forced it to destroy unused
product at a financial loss and accused the union of violating
state laws. 
    The ruling was widely seen as making it easier for
businesses to sue unions over strike-related conduct, which some
experts said could deter work stoppages.
    Lawyers for Glacier and the Teamsters affiliate did not
immediately respond to requests for comment. Glacier is a unit
of Japan-based Taiheiyo Cement Corp  5233.T .
    After Glacier sued the Teamsters in 2017, the union lodged a
complaint with the NLRB claiming that the lawsuit was a form of
unlawful retaliation. Federal law protects workers' rights to
strike but not any intentional destruction of property that
occurs in the process. 
    The Supreme Court in its 8-1 decision said the union did not
take steps to mitigate the risk of destroying Glacier's property
when it coordinated the strike, so its conduct was not protected
by the NLRA and the lawsuit was not preempted by the federal
law. The lawsuit also accuses the Teamsters of encouraging
drivers to skip work the day after the strike, delaying an
important project.
    The NLRB case was paused pending the Supreme Court ruling.
    In Thursday's ruling, Wedekind said Glacier's case differed
from others in which the NLRB had found that employers sued
unions or workers to discourage protected activity, such as
striking.
    "The evidence fails to establish that Glacier's animus
toward the strike or the drivers' other protected concerted
activities were a motivating factor" in deciding to sue, the
judge wrote.
    Wedekind, however, said Glacier did violate the NLRA by
issuing warning letters to 16 drivers who participated in the
strike. The company has already rescinded the letters, according
to the decision. 
    Wedekind's ruling can be appealed to the five-member NLRB. 
    The case is Glacier Northwest Inc, National Labor Relations
Board, No. 19–CA–203068.
    For Glacier Northwest: Brian Lundgren and Christopher Moon
of Jackson Lewis
    For the union: Ben Berger of Barnard Iglitzin & Lavitt 
    For the NLRB General Counsel: Daniel McCaskey and Rachel
Cherem
    
    Read more:
    US Supreme Court hands defeat to organized labor in truckers
strike case
    U.S. Supreme Court considers narrowing federal protections
for unions
    U.S. Supreme Court to decide if employers can sue unions
over vandalism