Wal-Mart and the UFCW case study only 4% final grade
in November 2003 Wal-Mart opened a new store in Weyburn,
Saskatchewan. Soon after the store opened employees contacted
the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) seeking
union representation. In April of 2004 the union filed an application
with the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board to represent the
store's employees. The union application to represent employees
is an application for certification and the details of this process are
referred to in Chapter 6. The application for certification was the
start of a legal battle that was ongoing in 2010.
The union sought an order from the Board to require Wal-Mart to
produce documents. It was alleged that Wal-Mart had provided
managers with materialsthat showed Wai-Mart was guilty of illegal
practices including "A Manager's Toolbox to Remain Union Free".
The Board ordered Wal- Mart to produce documentation and WalMart
appealed this decision. On the appeal a lower court judge
quashed the subpoena and in his decision appeared to suggest
that the Board was biased in favour of unions. Subsequently there
were numerous comments on the situation in the media some of
which were critical of the Labour Relations Board and the
provisions of the Trade Union Act that allowed a union to be
certified without an employee vote. There were calls for
amendments to the legislation and changes at the Board. Some
critics alleged that union contributions to the NDP party which was
in power at the time made change unlikely. The Court of Appeal
overturned the lower court decision and ordered Wai-Mart to
produce the documentation. The Court of Appeal also indicated
that the lower court's concerns regarding a possible bias in favour of unions by tl1e Labour Relations Board were unfounded. Wal
Mart attempted to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court of
Canada, and this further delayed the certification application. While
the Weyburn battle waged on, there w as a related development in
Quebec. In February 2005, Wal-Mart announced that it would
close a store in Jonquiere Quebec, which had been unionized for
four months. Labour activists claimed mat this closing was
intended to send a message to employees in Weyburn and
elsewhere in North America about the negative consequences of
seeking unionization. The president of the Saskatchewan
Federation of Labour referred to "economic terrorism" against
Canadian workers. In April 2005, one full year after the original
application for certification, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to grant Wal-Mart leave to appeal and tl1e certification process
continued. Wal-Mart filed an application to block the Labour
Relations Board from hearing the application alleging the Board
was biased; however, a court decision rejected that application.
Through tilis process, a Wal-Mart website stated that the company
respects "the individual rights of our associates and encourage
them to express their ideas, comments and concerns. Because we
believe in maintaining an open environment of open
communications, we do not believe
mere is a need for third-party representation". Wal-Mart had some
supporters in the ongoing battle with the union. O ne newspaper
commentary provided as follows: "This province's unions are
aggressive by nature, helped along by labour laws that favour
unions far more than business, some- thing that has been used by
businesses as a clear illustration as to why companies avoid
coming to Saskatchewan ... Presumabl)' the union has jobs for the
approximately 3500 to 4000 employees who would be put out of
work if Wal-Mart ... walked. Wal-Mart is a huge player in
Saskatchewan. It provides hundreds of employees with jobs. It
pays taxes. It is possibly the most popular retail outfit in the
province. To lose something like that would be a major blow to the
province's economy and employment levels not to mention the
government's open for business slogan it shops around the
country."
In a 2007 provincial election, the NDP government was defeated
by the Saskatchewan Party. In March of 2008 the new government ended the term of the chair of the Saskatchewan Labour Relations
Board who had been dealing with the UFCW certification
application. In May of 2008 amendments to the Trade Union A ct
that required a vote on certification applications came into effect.
The chair of the Board continued to deal with the Weyburn
application asserting that he had the authority to finish applications
started before his term was ended on tile basis of the law as it was
at the time of the application. In December of 2008 a certification
order was granted. In 2009 Wal-Mart challenged the certification in
court on the basis that the chair did not have jurisdiction and that
the amendments to the Trade Union Act required a vote. In June of
2009 a lower court overturned the certification. Subsequently the
union indicated that it would be appealing the decision. In July of
2009 Wai-Mart filed an application for a court injunction to restrict
the activity of a union website critical of the company. UFCW
Canada National President Wayne Hanley responded saying "
This injunction rec1uest is an over the top assault on effective freedom of speech . . . It's a kneejerk response by Walmart to the
idea of its employees trying to understand their options as workers,
and trying to share experiences with other 'associates'. Walmart's
response to the success of www.walmartworkerscanada.ca is
just another outrageous example of how tile largest retailer in the
history of the world will use its bottom less legal budget to
manipulate tile collective bargaining process and do just about
anything to discourage its 'associates' from joining the union."
Questions
1. Identify the employer's labour relations strategy, and explain
possible reasons for this strategy.
2. Outline the environmental factors referred to in Chapter 2
affecting this situation