Security guards in California received a 40% increase in salary and benefits after unionizing. In 2008, the security guards and SEIU "sought to bring the guards' hourly pay and benefits in line with those of janitors represented by the SEIU. Currently, janitors working in the same buildings and for the same management companies make up to $6 per hour more than guards -- who average around $8.50 per hour with no health insurance, paid vacation or other benefits...The deal results in a 40% increase in overall salary and benefits, according to Faith Culbreath, local head of the security officers' branch of the Service Employees International Union." [Los Angeles Times, 1/21/08]

The majority of the security guards were black men, and an increase in their salaries increased the amount of money going back into the black community. Faith Culbreath also provided the statistic that "Up to 70% of local private security jobs are filled by black men, and...the new deal would bring an estimated $50 million more per year in wages and benefits, "the vast majority of that going into the black community." [Los Angeles Times, 1/21/08]

• Higher Wages & Benefits Help U.S. Economy by Giving Workers the Ability to Purchase More Goods & Services: According to the Center for American Progress Action Fund report, unionization is good for the economy overall and "putting more money in workers' pockets would provide a needed boost for the U.S. economy." Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich stated that higher wages and higher benefits would give workers the purchasing power they need to buy more of the goods and services that this economy produces. [Center for American Progress Action Fund, "Unions Are Good for Workers and the Economy," 2/18/09]

Management of Enloe Medical Center Refused to Negotiate First Contract For Nearly Three Years After Workers Voted to Join a Union. Employees at Enloe Medical Center "first voted to form a union with United Healthcare Workers in April 2004, but the prior hospital administration challenged the election results. After every legal challenge was rejected, Enloe management finally agreed to negotiations in early 2007." The first collective bargaining agreement for the service workers at Enloe Medical Center was finally ratified on December 9, 2008. [Health Insurance Week, 12/21/08; Enloe Medical Center Press Release, 12/9/08]

More Than a Year After Voting to Unionize, Rite Aid Workers Said Management Refuses to Even Discuss Key Items Like Pay Scales. In December 2008, the Los Angeles Times reported, "Carlos Rubio, a Rite Aid warehouse worker in Palmdale, said negotiations with his employer over a first contract have dragged on since he and his co-workers voted to join the International Longshore and Warehouse Union in March. 'There are 35 articles on the table. We've agreed to four of them,' Rubio said. Rite Aid has agreed to minor provisions, such as what happens if an employee is called into military service, he said, but has not even begun to talk about pay scales and other more meaningful issues." In March 2009, union officials still argued that management was trying to "run out the clock" and refusing to work out a contract. [Los Angeles Times, 12/27/08; Michigan Chronicle, 3/11/09-3/17/09]

Inland Valley Medical Center Refused Good-Faith First Contract Negotiations for Two Years, Hoping the Delay Would Make the Nurses Give Up on the Union. In September 2008, the Press Enterprise reported, "Leaders of the California Nurses Association said, and a federal judge agreed, that a pattern of threats, intimidation and stalling happened at Inland Valley Medical Center in Wildomar, where registered nurses voted to unionize in 2004. Initially the hospital attempted to hold up the vote by asking it to include nurses in a hospital in Murrieta owned by the same corporation, King of Prussia, Pa.-based Universal Health Services Inc. The NLRB disagreed and ordered the election to go forward. Nurses ratified the union in May 2004, but almost two years passed with no contract and nurses, with nothing to show for their union membership, voted to decertify CNA." One year later, a judge tossed out the decertification election "after agreeing with union supporters who filed charges accusing hospital officials and outside consultants of surveillance, harassment and intimidation during the weeks leading up to that election," but CNA decided not to continue the fight, arguing that they were protecting nurses from the "outrageous anti-union campaign." [The Press Enterprise, 9/1/08, 8/23/08]

Workers at TXI Riverside Cement Voted to Join a Union in 2005, and Still Didn't Have a Contract At Least Three Years Later. In August 2007, the Press Enterprise reported, "The union representing workers at TXI Riverside Cement plans to mark the holiday weekend with what it calls an 'Angry Labor Day' rally Saturday, protesting the lack of a contract nearly two years after employees voted to unionize. About 80 workers at the plant at 1500 Rubidoux Blvd. voted in August 2005 to join United Steelworkers Local 12-48. But after nearly 30 meetings between the union and management, no contract has been reached... The union contends TXI is seeking to delay negotiations on a first contract in an effort to undermine workers' support for the union. For example, union leaders say negotiators met 26 times in the year after the union vote before TXI made its first complete economic proposal." As of April 2008, the San Bernardino County Sun reported that there was still no contract at the Rubidoux plant. [The Press Enterprise, 8/31/07; San Bernardino County Sun, 4/30/08]

Caregivers at Stockton Retirement Home Voted to Join a Union In 2005, But Management Stalled on a First Contract for Years. In April 2008, The National Labor Relations Board "recommended a new election be held at the O'Connor Woods retirement home in Stockton, after finding management violated federal law by threatening and misleading workers in the days prior to a previous union election in November... Workers at O'Connor Woods were pleased with the decision. Caregivers first voted to become members of SEIU United Healthcare Workers-West in 2005, but years of stalling tactics by management prevented them from winning a first contract." [SEIU Press Release, 4/16/08]

Nurses at Providence St. Joseph Medical Center Waited Years For Their First Contract. In September 2007, the San Fernando Valley Business Journal reported, "Two area hospitals--Antelope Valley Hospital and Providence St. Joseph Medical Center--have reached agreements with Service Employees International Union, United Healthcare Workers-West." Nurses initially voted to join the union in September 2002, but the results were challenged. The NLRB subsequently certified the union at Providence St. Joseph Medical Center in 2003. [San Fernando Valley Business Journal, 9/17/07; Los Angeles Times, 10/17/02, 6/4/03]

After an Initial Struggle to Join a Union, Nurses at Antelope Valley Hospital Had to Wait More than a Year to Get a Contract. In September 2007, the San Fernando Valley Business Journal reported, "Two area hospitals--Antelope Valley Hospital and Providence St. Joseph Medical Center--have reached agreements with Service Employees International Union, United Healthcare Workers-West. For Antelope Valley Hospital, settling on a contract marks the end of a five-year struggle." According to the Daily News of Los Angeles, "Negotiations started in July 2006 between the hospital and Service Employees International Union United Healthcare Workers West. In February 2006, the union won the right to represent about 1,200 eligible licensed vocational nurses, technicians, food service workers, clerical staffers and other support-service workers." The union had worked for three years just to get the initial vote to unionize. [San Fernando Valley Business Journal, 9/17/07; Daily News of Los Angeles, 1/13/07, 2/23/06]

Ongoing Struggle for Unionization: The Santa Barbara News-Press
The Santa Barbara News-Press Votes to Unionize, but Management questions the Legitimacy of the Vote The Santa Barbara News-Press has been involved in a 3-year controversy over the unionization of its workers. Wendy McCaw purchased the Santa Barbara News-Press in 2000, and the paper has been "embroiled in controversy since July 2006, when several top editors quit, saying publisher Wendy McCaw meddled with news coverage. The paper countered that the former employees had let their personal opinions influence news decisions." [AP, 8/18/07]

Employees overwhelmingly voted to join a union in September 2006. The newsroom employees voted to form a union in September 2006 but "have been fighting with the newspaper since then over the legitimacy of the vote, which has been certified by the NLRB." [AP, 1/27/09]

• The NLRB certified the September 2006 union election and unanimously rejected arguments made by newspaper management regarding unfair organizing tactics. After the election was disputed by newspaper management, "The National Labor Relations Board on Thursday unanimously rejected arguments made by newspaper management that unfair organizing tactics were used during a September election in which newsroom employees voted 33-6 in favor of joining the Graphics Communications Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. The ruling means the union can bargain with the newspaper." [AP, 8/18/07]

In addition to the appeal over the certification of the NLRB election, there was also an ongoing dispute over the firing of eight reporters. The NLRB's decision to certify the union elections at the Free-Press came "amid charges by the NLRB that the newspaper improperly fired eight reporters, six of whom hung a sign over a highway overpass earlier this year urging passers-by to cancel their subscriptions." [AP, 8/18/07]

• When the newspaper would not agree to settle the case against the reporters and re-hire them, the NLRB issued a complaint against the newspaper charging unfair labor practices. "The National Labor Relations Board served a complaint to the News-Press on Wednesday to begin the process of presenting its case against the newspaper. At issue is the paper's imposition of gag orders, which impeded employees' rights to communicate with each other and the public, and the Oct. 27 firing of senior writer and union supporter Melinda Burns, a 21-year News-Press veteran....The NLRB tried to settle the case with the News-Press, said Byron B. Kohn, acting regional director of the board. Resolution would require immediate reinstatement of Burns and a formal notice to the employees that the News-Press would not engage in similar conduct in the future, he said. When the paper didn't agree to settle, the NLRB issued the complaint and charged the News-Press with unfair labor practices. The board investigated the case by taking sworn affidavits from witnesses." [Ventura County Star, 12/29/06]

A judge ruled that the Santa Barbara News-Press "committed flagrant violations of federal labor laws when it fired eight journalists for engaging in union activities." Although managers testified that Melinda Burns and other reporters were fired for writing biased stories and disloyalty to the company, a judge "ruled that all eight were illegally fired for engaging in union activity. He also ruled that Davison and three colleagues were given poor performance reviews and denied bonuses for the same reason, and that Starshine Roshell's column was dropped because she supported the union." The judge ordered that the paper rehire the former employees. [Los Angeles Times, 1/1/08]

Despite an NLRB judge's finding that the employees were unlawfully fired, a federal judge refused to reinstate them. Following an appeal of the NLRB decision that the reporters were fired illegally, "A federal judge has denied a request by the National Labor Relations Board to reinstate eight workers fired from the Santa Barbara News-Press, according to a ruling made public Wednesday. The board claimed the workers were wrongfully terminated for union activity and other reasons. U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson said in his ruling that an injunction calling for the workers' reinstatement would prevent the paper from exercising what it's asserting as its First Amendment right to combat union efforts to limit its exercise of editorial discretion." [AP, 5/28/08]

Santa Barbara Free-Press Continues to Delay Bargaining and Bring Unsuccessful Suits Against Employees

In a suit against the Teamsters Union, the newspaper unsuccessfully claimed the union interfered with sales. In the conclusion of the first of several lawsuits brought by newspaper management against the union and employees, the result was that "A federal agency has dismissed a claim brought by the Santa Barbara News-Press against an employees union, concluding the newspaper failed to provide sufficient evidence that the union tried to interfere with newspaper sales. In an April 3 ruling, the National Labor Relations Board rejected arguments by newspaper management that the Graphics Communications Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters coerced or threatened employees and others to hurt sales of the paper at the Santa Barbara Farmers Market. The newspaper claimed Teamsters members impeded pedestrians at the market from buying the newspaper." [AP, 4/8/08]

The NLRB ruled that union representatives did nothing wrong when they organized an advertising boycott of the newspaper. Newspaper management also sued union representatives for organizing an advertising boycott of the Santa Barbara News-Press, but the NLRB ruled that the union representatives "did nothing wrong when they called for an advertising boycott of the Santa Barbara News-Press as part of an ongoing labor dispute. Lawyers for the newspaper had accused union officials of failing to bargain in good faith. In a letter dated Jan. 23, the National Labor Relations Board said it found no evidence the union had violated any labor law when it sought to discourage businesses from advertising in the newspaper." [AP, 1/27/09]