California ex rel. Harris v. Safeway, Inc. : Mismanaging the Intersection of Antitrust and Labor Law
Year: 2013
Type: article
Abstract: Journal of Business & Technology Lawof labor negotiations and undermining fair collective bargaining.8 Alternatively, applying the nonstatutory labor exemption to temporary revenue sharing provisions would further antitrust and labor policy by avoiding false positives, reducing litigation costs, and encouraging mutually beneficial negotiations.9 I. The Case A. Factual BackgroundWith their current collective bargaining agreement expiring in October of 2003, three of Southern California's largest supermarket chains, Ralphs, Albertson's and Vons, formed a multiemployer collective bargaining unit (MEBU) 10 to negotiate a new labor contract (CBA) with the United Food and Commercial Workers labor organization (UCFW).11 A month before the old labor contract expired, the grocers executed two Mutual Strike Assistant Agreements (collectively the "Agreement") 12 to prepare for the upcoming negotiations.13 The employers, in anticipation of union whipsaw tactics, 14 agreed to abide by a revenue sharing provision (RSP) and lock out all union employees within forty-eight hours of a strike.15 In addition, the RSP included Food 4 Less, a supermarket not privy to the disputed contract.16 Food 4 Less agreed to the RSP because its own labor agreement would expire in the near 8. See infra Part IV.B. 9. See infra Part IV.B. 10.Multiemployer bargaining units form when several employers in one industry join together to collectively negotiate with a union.Comment, Employer Withdrawal from Multiemployer Bargaining Units: A Proposal for Self-Regulation, 130 U. PA.L. REV.689, 689 (1982).Typically, both employers and unions favor the use of multiemployer bargaining units to facilitate efficient negotiations.Id.Once the National Labor Relations Board, a federal regulatory agency, certifies a multiemployer bargaining unit with each party's consent, employer and union can begin negotiations.Id. at 690. 11.Cal.ex rel.Lockyer v. Safeway, Inc., 371 F. Supp.2d 1179, 1182 (C.D. Cal.2005), aff'd in part and rev'd in part by Cal.ex rel.Brown v. Safeway, Inc., 615 F.3d 1171 (9th Cir.2010), aff'd in part and rev'd in part by Cal.ex rel.Harris v. Safeway, Inc., 615 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir.2011) (en banc).As one of the nation's largest labor unions, the UFCW represents over 1.3 million workers in retail food and clothing industries, meatpacking, poultry and other food processing industries, and health care, garment, chemical and distillery industries.Brief of Amici Curiae United Food and Commercial Workers International Union 1, Cal. ex rel.Brown v. Safeway, Inc., 615 F.3d 1171 (9th Cir.2011) (Filed No. 08-55671, No. 08-55708), 2009 WL 2824441, at *1.12. The two agreements were identical in substance, except each applied to a different labor organization.Lockyer, 371 F. Supp.2d at 1182 & n.1.13. Id. at 1182.14.Whipsaw tactics are stratagems designed to act as economic weapons by exerting pressure on one employer within a multiemployer bargaining unit.In California ex rel.Harris v. Safeway, Inc., the union employed selective strikes and picketing during the lockout.651 F.
Author: Peter L. Cooch
Language: English
Topic: Labor Movements and Unions
Subfield: Industrial relations
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W621043145