NLRB Dismisses Bid to Decertify Hadley Trader Joe’s Union

---

The National Labor Relations Board has dismissed an attempt some workers at Trader Joe’s in Hadley had made to eject their labor union from the shop. 

This summer, longtime employee Les Stratford filed a decertification petition, as it’s known, with the National Labor Relations Board, asking to remove Trader Joe’s United as the union representing workers at the Hadley store. In July 2022, workers at the Hadley shop formed the first-ever union at the grocery giant, sparking the creation of what has become an independent union representing workers at four Trader Joe’s locations nationwide. 

But union members say the company has fought them since that summer, allegedly breaking labor law in the process. And workers opposing the union have received legal support from a national, anti-union nonprofit in their attempt to decertify the union. The NLRB has now dismissed that decertification petition because of the union’s pending allegations of unfair labor practices committed by Trader Joe’s.

Laura Sacks, the regional director of the NLRB, said in her Oct. 8 decision that until the day of that decision, “none of the serious allegations have been remedied” and that unremedied unfair labor practices can have a “coercive” impact on worker’s perception of union performance and undermine a union’s ability to bargain. 

Stratford filed the decertification petition on July 31. Stratford alleged that if the NLRB were to dismiss the petition, it would violate due process because he was not party to the determination hearings and could not object. 

The union, however, had already been in the midst of an unfair labor practice case against the store. The union’s allegations include that the employer had “interrogated employees about their union activities” and provided “false and misleading information to employees nationwide about the status of bargaining between the Employer and the Union.” 

TJU has also alleged acts of retaliation against union employees. The union has said that Steve Andrade, a Trader Joe’s employee of 20 years and active union supporter, was fired without due process and two unionized workplaces in Hadley and Minneapolis, Minnesota, received a “less favorable retirement benefit” compared to the rest of the non-unionized workplaces nationwide. And in May, a California judge struck down an attempt by Trader Joe’s to sue the union over trademark infringement, describing the company’s lawsuit as “exceptionally weak” and meritless and ordering the company to pay the union more than $100,000 in attorneys’ fees.

Jaime Edwards, the president of TJU, stated in a press release that Trader Joe’s has been engaging in union-busting tactics comparable to those used by Starbucks and Amazon. They said the company is not as progressive as they market themselves as.

“The company’s unlawful conduct and blatant disregard for workers’ rights would make it impossible to hold a fair vote,” Edwards wrote. “The decision to dismiss this decertification petition was possible because we knew our rights, stood our ground, and fought to hold Trader Joe’s accountable.”

Edwards did not respond to several interview requests for this article.

The lead petitioners — Stratford and Michael Alcorn, another longtime Trader Joe’s employee — were provided free legal aid by the anti-union National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. That organization has worked in states nationwide to pass so-called “right-to-work” laws barring all unions from collecting dues from non-members despite the benefits those workers receive from union-won contracts. The foundation was one of the forces behind the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Janus v. AFSCME, which limited dues collection from non-union members in the public sector. Unions nationwide decried that decision, which AFSCME described as “a threat to all working people.”

As of 2023, only 6% of private-sector employees, like those in TJU, are unionized statewide. 

In an opinion piece published by the Wall Street Journal, Alcorn and Stratford said “most of the allegations against the company took place before the initial unionization election.” 

Last year, in an interview with “Labor Relations Radio,” Alcorn said he had lost an opportunity to get either a 6% bonus or have 10% of their income of the previous year added to their 401k. He alleged that was because of the union’s refusal to sign off on the benefits.

In the union’s first bargaining meeting with the company, TJU’s summary of the session said that they had corresponded with the employer’s team to accept the changes in benefits for crew members’ 401k. The employer’s team stated that they did not receive the union’s acceptance, but that both parties had agreed that the changes would be implemented in both the Hadley and Minneapolis locations. 

But this did not happen. The union’s second bargaining meeting summary alleged that under contract language the company proposed, the union would not have been able to file unfair labor practice charges if anything went wrong with the implementation of the benefits and could fully exclude unionized workplaces from the retirement benefit plans in general. TJU alleges that the employer had made verbal agreements to keep the 401k benefits the same, but would not certify it in writing or confirm that unionized stores would remain in the retirement plan if the proposal was ratified, leading to the deal being called off. 

Pointing to past NLRB decisions, Sacks pointed out that unions have the most “optimal power” in their certification year. On Dec. 6, 2023, two months into the union beginning to bargain for its contract, Trader Joe’s nationally announced that the Hadley and Minneapolis locations were not eligible to participate in the retirement benefits it had offered all employees in 2022 and “blamed” the union for this outcome. As a result, workers with less than 10 years of experience couldn’t receive more than 5% contribution of their income. 

“The employer’s discriminatory and unilateral replacement of the retirement benefit, and subsequent nationwide blaming of the union for the less favorable plan,” Sacks said, “would reasonably cause employees to lose faith in the union’s ability to protect their benefits and effectively represent them.”

Alcorn and Stratford’s opinion piece also said that rather than addressing workers’ concerns over wages and benefits during a bargaining session, that the bargaining team instead “negotiated over things like ‘pronoun pins,’ which the company already provides.”

Attempts to reach Alcorn and Stratford for comment were unsuccessful.

On TJU’s website, a summary of bargaining negotiations that happened March 7 and 9, 2023, said: “When we asked TJ’s legal team about the problematic language limiting pins to crew “who feel misgendered,” we were assured that all crew would get a pronoun pin if they asked for one. However, we’re already seeing reports online of crew members being refused these pins.”

In the same meeting summary, TJU said they offered proposals that would raise the minimum wage that new crew members would receive and increase the amount of time for sick leave, personal days, bereavement, and more. 

TJU has been in contract negotiations since Nov. 3, 2022, and say they have faced significant obstacles at the bargaining table. 

Earlier this year, Trader Joe’s followed SpaceX, and later Amazon and Starbucks, in an effort to deem the NLRB unconstitutional in its structure and organization as a defense to complaints of unfair labor practices filed against the companies.

Speaking earlier this year on The Shoestring’s “Trippin’ on the Shoestring” podcast, Edwards said that the effort “was sort of like losing a game and trying to change the rules halfway through.” 

“For a long time they’ve been saying that they haven’t been breaking the law,’ Edwards said. “And now, when it’s clear that they’re not actually going to be able to defend that, they no longer want the laws to exist.”

As of Oct. 23, 2024, the National Right to Work Foundation and Stratford have submitted a request for a review of the NLRB’s decision to dismiss the decertification process. The request states that Stratford and his coworkers have a right to hold the decertification election even if allegations of conduct violations by the employer have not yet been resolved. 

Sacks’ decision does leave open the possibility of workers refiling the decertification petition after the unfair labor practice case has been resolved. If more than 30% of workers file such a petition, the NLRB holds an election in the store to determine whether workers want to keep their union representation or reject it.

---

The Shoestring is committed to bringing you ad-free content. We rely on readers to support our work! You can support independent news for Western Mass by visiting our Donate page.