Sands, Culinary back to severance negotiations

Jeff Schweers

Wednesday, June 26, 1996 | 11:59 a.m.

The rejection of a severance package by Culinary Union employees sends lawyers for the Sands and the union back to the negotiating table to try to forge a deal before the doors shut Sunday on the aging hotel-casino.

The severance package offered to all 1,200 workers expires when the Sands closes to build a $1.5 billion mega-resort and convention complex that would be the world's biggest at 6,000 rooms.

Sands officials were steadfast in their offer, calling it an issue of fairness to all workers.

"This is the same economic offer all our other union and non-union employees received," said David Friedman, assistant to Sands owner Sheldon Adelson.

The package offers most employees two weeks pay, and health benefits through July 31 -- the minimum required by the federal Warren Act because they did not give employees the required 60 days notice.

But workers with more than five years with the Sands will receive four to 52 weeks pay, depending on their longevity.

If no deal is reached, about 600 Culinary Union members will wind up with no additional benefits beyond what is required by federal law, union negotiator John Wilhelm said.

The Sands would still be obligated to pay two extra weeks, give workers a final paycheck, pay off all unused vacation time, and pay health and welfare payments through Oct. 31, Wilhelm said.

Many workers have already accepted the severance package, including at least three other bargaining units whose members were not given a chance to vote on the deal.

But when the Culinary Union put it to a vote, workers rejected the deal Monday 173-35.

Union leaders said the package was rejected because it didn't offer enough compensation and offered no recall or preferential hiring rights.

Friedman disputed the claim that union workers were being asked to give up recall or preferential hiring privileges.

"Never. There is never, there was never any requirement to waive any rights to receive the severence package," Friedman said.

Friedman said the union is trying to muddle the real issue -- that the company rejected an additional five years of recall rights and refused to pay Culinary workers more than other employees. He also said if the union was so concerned about its workers, it should have included a severance package in its collective bargaining agreement.

"The Sands was under no legal obligation to provide any additional severance than under (the Warren Act)," Friedman said. "We wanted to provide more because it was the right thing to do."