Word: anti-union
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...tenants from 7 Sumner Rd. The last few residents finally gave up their legal battle and departed, weary of fighting for their homes against a University that was willing to pour thousands of dollars and thousands of hours of legal talent into evicting them. Many Harvard employees, angry at anti-union campaigns, have complained as well. The seed Harvard has planted with its tenants is starting to bear fruit; a month ago, they began to band together in a Harvard tenant union to complain about abuses and demand fairer treatment. And there are some signs their tactics will work?...
...Unicco has never engaged in any anti-union activities or done anything to intentionally harm, disrespect, or humiliate its employees,” the company said in a statement last month. The company also said it has never been found in violation of federal or state laws while operating at UMiami...
...security guards and dining hall workers on Harvard’s campus, Gould-Wartofsky says.SLAM, he says, hopes to strengthen the prospects of a union for the security guards subcontracted to the University through AlliedBarton Security Services by demanding that Harvard require a card-check neutrality agreement prohibiting anti-union activity from all its subcontractors.Snegroff says that the SEIU local—which is presently undertaking efforts to organize the AlliedBarton security guards on Harvard’s campus—promotes card-check neutrality agreements.“We want that for any site,” she says.But...
When workers try to form a union, they can expect any number of responses—except for cooperation. A majority of employers hire union-busting consultants and force workers to attend one-on-one anti-union meetings. If workers are immigrants, some employers threaten to call the Department of Homeland Security. One in four employers facing a union campaign illegally fires at least one worker...
...this issue several times, including in Bartnicki v. Vopper, a 2001 case involving negotiations between a Pennsylvanian teacher’s union and a district school board. During the discussions, an inflammatory cell phone call was illegally intercepted and the tape of that call was passed on to an anti-union intermediary, who gave the tape to Vopper, a radio news commentator. Vopper, knowing that the tape had been obtained in violation of wiretap and other privacy laws, aired it anyway. The court ruled that this was acceptable: “Privacy concerns give way when balanced against the interest...