Labor board reviewing Target union vote
(Page 2 of 3)
“Eighty-five courageous workers from Valley Stream should be commended for withstanding the intimidation and scare tactics Target management suffocated them with every day leading to the June 17 election,” Both said. Target had an opportunity to become a corporate role model and do right by its employees, he added, but instead chose to focus on profit growth.
Target officials did not comment specifically on the pending charges or allegations. “Target is committed to following all laws and firmly believes we did so throughout this process,” said spokeswoman Molly Snyder. “We believe this was a fair election in which our team members had the chance to make private decisions. It was our hope that our team members’ decision would have been honored and that the union would have respected our team’s personal decisions not to unionize.”
Company officials said their emphasis is on creating a workplace environment where team members don’t want or need union representation, and that Target works to create an environment of mutual trust with its employees, Snyder also said.
Following the election, NLRB announced proposed changes to the union election process, intending to reduce unnecessary litigation, streamline pre- and post-election procedures, and facilitate the use of electronic communications and document filing, officials said. The proposed amendments called for parties in a dispute to state their positions by the start of any federal hearings, and for the non-petitioning party to provide a preliminary voters list, among other items. Essentially, the rules will make sure employees are free to choose whether or not they are represented at work, in a quick, fair and accurate way, said Chairman Wilma B. Liebman. The NLRB is set to discuss the proposed rules at an open public meeting later this month, according to its website.