 |
| click to enlarge |
The charges stem from an incident on February 23rd when DiLibero allegedly tried to take unlawful retaliatory actions against town hall employees' shop steward Liz Jarvis.
The charges were "held in abeyance" (literally stuck in a drawer at the state Labor Board) while DiLibero and the Teamsters attempted to negotiate an informal solution.
On June 27, the Teamsters attorney notified the state Labor Board that negotiations had failed.
So now what?
According to the Teamsters ULP charge, Bill DiLibero approached the Teamsters business agent (the staff guy for the union who represents the Town Hall workers) on February 23rd. DiLibero wanted Elizabeth Jarvis removed as shop steward for Town Hall workers. Liz works under Tax Assessor Ken Swain.
Under the labor law, the boss (DiLibero) does not get to pick who represents unionized workers. To attempt to do so would appear, on its face, to be an unfair labor practice.
When the Teamsters staff rep refused DiLibero's demand for Jarvis's removal, the charge alleges that DiLibero then discussed with Swain what they considered to be the problem of Jarvis's continued role as shop steward. According to the Teamster complaint, Swain suggested cutting Jarvis's hours back to part-time, although he acknowledged - says the complaint - that doing so might be seen as retaliation and that "could be a problem."
If true, Swain was right to think that it "could be a problem" because such retaliation is a very clear - indeed egregious - violation of labor law.
After the initial charge was filed last March, the union and town managers tried to negotiate a mutually agreeable settlement. I had heard the framework for an informal settlement was some form of public apology from DiLibero to Jarvis and Town Hall workers. The re-filing of charges means the two sides could not agree to how to do that, and back away from this issue.
Now that the union had re-filed an amended complaint, the RI Labor Board will investigate and issue its own findings of fact. If DiLibero did ask the union to remove Jarvis, and if DiLibero and Swain did discuss cutting her hours, then the Labor Board will almost certainly decide in favor of the union and hold Charlestown in violation of labor law.
I worked in the labor movement for over a decade and have seen enough of these to feel pretty confident in predicting that outcome. I also know the Gursky law firm that's representing the Teamsters. They are the best labor lawyers in the state.
Fortunately for Charlestown, the sanctions it faces are modest. The Teamsters complaint asks for the following remedies:
- A finding from the state Labor Board that the Town violated state labor law;
- An order from the Labor Board enjoining the Town from cutting Liz Jarvis's hours;
- An order from the Labor Board enjoining the Town from any future threats against Jarvis or other union members for exercising their rights under state labor law.
Usually, the Labor Board requires the guilty employer to post a prominent notice basically saying "I'm sorry and won't do it again." The union is not asking for fines or compensation and typically the Labor Board does not require any in cases like this.
NOTE: if you have trouble reading either of the documents, send an e-mail to progressivecharlestown@gmail.com and we'll send you a full-sized PDF file.
 |
| Click to enlarge |