Reference no: EM133358212

Case Incident Walmart and the UFCW

In November 2003 Walmart opened a new store in Weyburn, Saskatchewan. Soon afterwards, employees contacted the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) seeking representation. In April 2004, the union filed an application with the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board to represent these employees. The application to represent is an application for certification, the details of which are referred to in Chapter 6. This filing was the start of a legal battle that lasted until 2013.

The union sought an order from the Board to require Walmart to produce documents. It was alleged that Walmart had provided managers with materials that showed Walmart was guilty of illegal practices, including a document titled "A Manager's Toolbox to Remain Union Free." The Board ordered Walmart to produce records and Walmart appealed this decision. On the appeal, a lower court judge quashed the subpoena and in the 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 Walmart 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 the Labour Relations Board were unfounded. Walmart attempted to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, and this further delayed the certification application.

While the Weyburn battle raged, there was a related development in Quebec. In February 2005, Walmart announced that it would close a store in Jonquière, Quebec, which had been unionized for four months. Labour activists claimed that 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 Walmart leave to appeal, and the certification process continued. Walmart 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 this process, Walmart stated that it respected "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 there is a need for third-party representation." Walmart had some supporters in the ongoing battle. One 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, something that has been used by businesses as a clear illustration as to why companies avoid coming to Saskatchewan. . . . Presumably the union has jobs for the approximately 3,500 to 4,000 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 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, and in May 2008 amendments to the Trade Union Act that required a vote on certification applications came into effect. The chair of the Board continued to deal with the Weyburn application, asserting he had the authority to finish applications started before his term was ended, on the basis of the law as it was at the time. In December 2008, a certification order was granted. In 2009, Walmart 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 2009, a lower court overturned the certification. Subsequently, the union indicated that it would be appealing the decision.

In July 2009, Walmart 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, "This injunction request 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 are trying to share experiences with other 'associates'. Walmart's response to the success of www.walmartworkerscanada.ca is just another outrageous example of how the largest retailer in the history of the world will use its bottomless legal budget to manipulate the collective bargaining process and do just about anything to discourage its 'associates' from joining the union."

In August 2013, the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board made the decision to decertify the United Food and Commercial Workers union, which had been unsuccessful in its attempts to negotiate a collective agreement with the retail giant. Employees at the Weyburn store had voted to remove the union by a margin of 51-5.

Questions

1. Identify the employer's labour relations strategy and explain possible reasons for this approach.

2. Outline the environmental factors in Chapter 2 that affect this situation.

3. In the light of the Supreme Court of Canada decision (June 2014) involving Walmart and a Quebec store closure in 2005, how might the company's labour relations strategies be modified?