Culinary Union, NAACP at odds over Indian gaming

Thursday, Oct. 29, 1998 | 10:49 a.m.

"We are completely incensed with Pete Wilson's comments of late," said NAACP spokesman Vilasen Govender on Wednesday. "We consider Native Americans to be part of our family."

Last week, the governor said a lawyer who advised the Indian tribes on Proposition 5 should "lose his scalp" because the tribes are wasting millions of dollars on a measure Wilson believes violates the state constitution. Many have called the remark racist.

Californians will cast ballots Tuesday on Proposition 5, which would legalize outlawed forms of gambling and require the governor to sign gambling compacts according to terms set by the tribes, including the number of machines allowed at casinos.

More than $71 million has already been spent on the heated battle over the initiative.

Critics contend the proposition, if approved, would lead to the proliferation of Indian gambling that they believe is insufficiently regulated and taxed.

NAACP representatives in Sacramento said informal telephone polls they conducted among black voters indicate heavy support for Proposition 5. NAACP statewide spokesman Nate White said 177 delegates representing the organization's California branches voted unanimously to support the Indian gambling measure.

"The NAACP stands up for folks who have gotten a raw deal," said Yes on 5 campaign spokesman Dan Pellissier.

Meanwhile, union members picketed outside the Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Chronicle buildings after the newspapers endorsed the measure. They said they oppose the initiative because it doesn't guarantee that unions will be able to organize at the Indian casinos.

"The L.A. Times took absolutely no notice of worker rights in their endorsement," said Jack Gribbon, political action coordinator for the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union, which is known as the Culinary Union in Las Vegas. "We were amazed at the lack of responsibility by the Los Angeles Times on this issue."

Gribbon was joined by about two dozen members of the union's local chapter, who chanted: "They say yes on 5. We say no on 5."

They carried placards with a red "X" drawn on blown-up versions of the Times editorial. Others carried large pictures of hilltop opulent homes they say are owned by members of the San Manuel Band of Serrano Indians, which has given about $26.8 million to support the proposition, according to campaign finance reports.

Stan McGarr, executive secretary of the Pala Band of Mission Indians, joined the protest. Pala is one of 11 tribes that signed a compact with Wilson that doesn't allow the kinds and numbers of machines wanted by the Yes on 5 backers, although it includes provisions that allow union organization.

"I thought the L.A. Times would be a fair paper, read the proposition and see all of the anti-labor issues there," he said. "It doesn't give worker rights, the California people or casino tribes a fair shake."

Supporters of the measure, meanwhile, insisted the measure protects worker rights.

Michael Leon, an official with the construction workers' Labors International Union of North America, agreed. "We don't feel that Indian tribal members are anti-union," he said.

Without the passage of Proposition 5, thousands of people working in Indian casinos would lose their jobs, supporters say.

"If they're not employed, there's no workers rights," Leon said. "The question I always ask is, 'How to do you organize unemployed casino workers?"'