Judge weighing arguments in union organization drive at Jensen Precast

Grace Leong

Tuesday, July 11, 2000 | 10:47 a.m.

The government says Nevada concrete products maker Jensen Precast must be forced to immediately recognize the Carpenters Union because possible delays in hearings on labor law charges against the firm may hurt workers' rights to join the union.

The National Labor Relations Board on June 13 sued Jensen midway through a National Labor Relations Board hearing before an administrative law judge that began March 13 on charges the union filed in August 1999. The NLRB said it filed the lawsuit because it fears the company may use "the passage of time" to try to further undermine union support.

The union alleged Jensen -- which has about 450 workers in its five non-unionized plants in North Las Vegas; Sparks; Sacramento, Calif.; Fontana, Calif. and Bend, Ore. -- fired five workers who participated in a strike from June 8 through Aug. 20 and allegedly offered large wages and bonuses to workers if they agreed to stop supporting the union.

A bargaining order is necessary "because the Board's administrative proceedings often are protracted, and absent interim relief, a respondent could accomplish its unlawful objective before being placed under any legal restraint," the agency filing said.

But Dwight Armstrong, Jensen's attorney, disagreed at a hearing Monday on the NLRB's petition for a bargaining order. "The NLRB is asking for the union bargaining order to be awarded even if the administrative law judge was to determine the order is inappropriate."

"Waiting for another two to three months is insignificant because the administrative law judge already said it won't take long for him to issue a decision," he said.

The government said both parties and administrative law judge Gerald Wacknov have agreed to several hearing dates in August and September in Las Vegas, Reno and San Bernardino, Calif.

At Monday's hearing, U.S. District Judge Lloyd George said he expects to make a decision on the petition for an emergency bargaining order later this week.

Jensen, in a June 27 response to the NLRB's lawsuit, said its workers should decide whether to join the union and the court should not interfere with the NLRB's "traditional and preferred method for assessing employee free choice -- the secret ballot."

The NLRB disagreed, saying Jensen has committed significant labor law violations that "render the notion of 'free choice' in an election mere speculation."

The government said Jensen called a meeting of key union supporters during the strike and allegedly made significant threats of job loss on the one hand, and generous offers of a pay rise on the other.

"So as to drive the point home, Jensen's officials advised the employees that their permanent replacement was impending and that the offer of increased wages would not remain open indefinitely," the NLRB said. "Jensen persisted and successfully induced a leading union supporter to return to work with a grant of a pay rise and job promotion, thus breaking the camel's back."

The government also disputed Jensen's claims that its decision to implement the wage increases was finalized on May 28, saying Jensen's records, which it says were produced in the hearing, show that its decision was reached on June 30, after the strike began.

The union, in its response last week to what it calls a "misguided attack" by Jensen, disputed the company's claims that the union is being investigated by the FBI for alleged witness tampering.

"We tried to verify if there was an FBI investigation pending, but they can't confirm or deny that," said Kathleen Jorgenson, the Carpenters' attorney. "To my knowledge, the FBI hasn't contacted the union, myself or the NLRB."

Jensen claimed the union "bought" support by "paying workers huge weekly stipends" and also noted that a former Jensen worker, Andres Avila, testified that Juan Carlos Leyva, a Carpenters' organizer, had allegedly offered to find Avila a job if he didn't testify.

But the union and Leyva denied those allegations, saying Jensen allegedly tried to induce and coerce witnesses into testifying in its favor.

The union said a witness, Napoleon Bonaparte, was threatened with jail for contempt for failure to comply with a subpoena if he didn't testify on Jensen's behalf.

It also said Bonaparte was given a subpoena and a $50 check for witness fees and was allegedly offered more money during a meeting with Jensen's attorney, Armstrong. and its labor consultant, Ed Villanueva.

The union said Bonaparte, in another meeting, was allegedly instructed by Juan Calvo, Jensen's production manager, on how he was to testify.