Anti-union group blames MGM deal on Detroit bid

Monday, Nov. 17, 1997 | 12:47 p.m.

Is there a connection between an effort by MGM Grand to win approval to build a $400 million casino in Detroit and the successful conclusion of contract negotiations between the hotel and the Culinary Union in Las Vegas?

Attorney Greg Smith, representing MGM employees who opposed a contract ratification vote last Thursday, thinks there is.

"I have no hard evidence," Smith said Friday, "but that's the way the union operates."

The attorney believes that for MGM to remain in the running with three other bidders for the right to build in Detroit, it was necessary for them to reach the contract settlement now instead of allowing negotiations to drag on indefinitely.

Negotiations began a year ago, after a Nov. 15, 1996, card check vote that gave the Culinary Union the right to represent an estimated 3,100 affected MGM employees.

A settlement between the 40,000-member union and MGM was reached the night of Nov. 8.

The day before, Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer announced that MGM Grand and three others were in the running for a casino license.

Also surviving the Nov. 7 cut were Atwater/Circus Circus, Mirage Resorts Inc. and Greektown/Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians.

Companies dropped from contention were the Trump Motor City Casino, Don Barden's Majestic Star Casino, and Paradise Valley/Rio.

John Wilhelm, chief negotiator for the Culinary workers, laughed off Smith's accusation, which was made in the course of a hearing Friday before the National Labor Relations Board.

"That is totally false, categorically untrue," Wilhelm said. "I think he is scurrilous and reprehensible for making the accusation."

While Wilhelm was on the witness stand in the NLRB courtroom Friday afternoon, testifying about the negotiations between MGM and the Culinary Union and why a year was a reasonable period for them to last, Smith asked Wilhelm if he had communicated with Detroit.

Wilhelm said he had, but the communication had nothing to do with the selection of a company to build a casino in Detroit.

He said he spoke to a member of the Detroit Teamsters Union who believed the MGM Grand opposed the union.

Wilhelm testified that he told the man he disagreed with that belief.

The purpose of the NLRB hearing was to allow Smith to present evidence in support of a fourth petition by anti-union employees to decertify the union at MGM based on his claim that the contract negotiation was not completed in a reasonable length of time.

All other petitions, filed on behalf of porter Bruce Segar and cook Jane Reidhead, have failed to get the secret ballot election the protesters say they want.

At the conclusion of the two-hour meeting, attorneys were told to submit briefs stating their position by this Friday.

Smith's clients believe the contract negotiations took to long and therefore employees should be allowed to vote on whether the union should be dissolved.

Segar and Reidhead claim they speak for more than 1,700 MGM employees who don't want to unionize.

On Thursday 843 employees went to the Culinary Union hall to cast their ballots.

A total of 740 voted to ratify the 60-page contract and 103 opposed ratification.

Segar believes the low turnout clearly shows who is more representative of employees and that employees want to be allowed the right to vote their preference.

But Jim Arnold, secretary-treasurer of Culinary Local 226, noted that fewer than 50 percent of eligible voters turn out for a presidential election.