<<previous  |  index  |  next>>

VI. Freedom of Association at Wal-Mart: Anti-Union Tactics Comporting with US Law

Wal-Mart is very good at this.  I’m impressed with their anti-union apparatus.  Starting with the Union Hotline activity, they monitor it, and as soon as something comes up, they swoop in and snuff it out.  It’s just amazing. . . .  In my experience, this is becoming more and more common, but no one does it like Wal-Mart. 

—James Porcaro, attorney for the UFCW in an NLRB case against Wal-Mart alleging unfair labor practices at its New Castle, Pennsylvania, store.³²²

Wal-Mart’s carefully honed anti-union message is succinctly summarized in its “union philosophy,” set out in its 2005 employee handbook, which states, “We are not anti-union; we are pro-Associate.  It is our position that every Associate can speak for himself or herself without having to pay hard-earned money to a union in order to be listened to and have issues resolved.”³²³  Another Wal-Mart document states under the heading, “Wal-Mart’s Philosophy on Unions,” that the company is “strongly opposed to third party representation,” the term the company applies relentlessly to union formation.³²⁴

Wal-Mart’s epithet of worker organizing as “third-party” activity mischaracterizes the dynamic of workers’ freedom of association and illustrates the company’s opposition to this fundamental right.  Unions do not organize workers; workers self-organize with help from union representatives.  By campaigning against a “third party,” Wal-Mart implicitly threatens workers who might exercise their rights of association by accusing them of betraying the company in favor of that “third party.”

As detailed below, Wal-Mart has devised a sophisticated anti-union strategy aimed at inundating workers with overwhelming amounts of one-sided information about the possible negative impact of union formation while providing union supporters little if any opportunity to counter with a positive message about organizing.  The company makes its hostility to unions perfectly clear to workers through its store managers, members of its Labor Relations Team, computer-based learning modules (CBLs), and videos and PowerPoint presentations that the company often shows workers during trainings and organizing drives.³²⁵ 

Workers repeatedly told Human Rights Watch that union supporters were cowed by Wal-Mart, fearing the repercussions of defying their powerful employer’s wish that they reject union formation.  “Dina Eldridge,” a Spring Mountain Road, Las Vegas, Nevada, Sam’s Club worker and union supporter, explained, “Some of these meetings and videos really worked on some who had signed [union] cards.  A lot of people were intimidated by the company—too scared to say anything.  They need their jobs.”³²⁶  

Even Wal-Mart policies aimed at closely monitoring and responding to worker morale and its Open Door Policy, which standing alone might be considered good business practices, are explicitly conceived and implemented as an important part of Wal-Mart’s efforts to preempt workers’ exercise of their right to freedom of association.³²⁷  

In this climate laced with anti-union bias and largely closed to pro-union views, workers’ internationally recognized right to choose freely whether or not to organize is violated. 

The Manager’s Toolbox    

The Manager’s Toolbox is a document available to all salaried managers on the company’s intranet.³²⁸  It was prepared by Wal-Mart’s Labor Relations Team to provide managers with “valuable information on how to remain union free in the event union organizers choose your facility as their next target” and serves as a “resource for managers in developing strategies for union avoidance.”³²⁹  The Toolbox instructs managers, “Take time to familiarize yourself with the content in this site.”³³⁰  

The Toolbox is a written document that can be introduced as evidence in unfair labor practice proceedings, so it presents Wal-Mart’s sophisticated strategy to defeat worker organizing efforts as conforming to legal requirements.  Managers at all levels receive intensive training on union prevention, based largely on the Toolbox, and they put that training into practice at Wal-Mart stores across the United States.

The Toolbox instructs managers that to keep unions out of the company’s US stores, they must monitor morale in their facilities using a list of morale indicators.  The Toolbox cautions managers: 

If your responses to the morale survey indicate the facility may have low morale, then you could be vulnerable to a union-organizing attempt.  Now is the time to fix them!  Address your Associates’ issues!  Don’t wait for a union to volunteer to [f]ix the morale problems for you.³³¹

The Toolbox also includes a section titled, “The Facts on Unions,” which tells managers:

It is important Associates understand the facts about unions.  Organizers may promise Associates more money, better benefits, . . . anything . . . to get them to sign union authorization cards.  It i[s] imperative our Associates know what unions can and cannot do for them. 

The Toolbox elaborates with selected claims designed to underscore limitations and possible drawbacks of union formation:

Unions CANNOT:            

Guarantee higher wages

Guarantee better benefit[s]

Guarantee employment

Guarantee hours worked

Prevent terminations

Set job standards

Unions CAN:

Collect dues, fees, fines and assessments

Negotiate

Strike.³³²

The Toolbox provides sample questions and answers on a variety of union-related topics and articulates the information that managers should provide to their workers about unions, crafting a message that highlights the company’s negative view of organizing.³³³  That message is summarized in a list of “do’s” at the end of the Toolbox.³³⁴  In addition to reminding management to “share any personal experiences you may have had with a union” and emphasize to workers that Wal-Mart does not “believe they need third-party representation,” the list of “do’s” instructs managers:

Do tell associates if a union is voted in, everything (their wages, benefits and working conditions) would go on the bargaining table.  It is much like the game show LET’S MAKE A DEAL!  They could get more, they could get the same, or they could get less.  Regardless, they will be responsible for dues, fees, fines, and assessments; . . .

Do tell associates the union cannot make Wal-Mart agree to anything it does not want to during negotiations.³³⁵

The “Grass Roots” Process

The Grass Roots process is characterized in the Manager’s Toolbox as an annual opportunity for workers “to talk openly about ideas and concerns” and complete “confidential surveys” shared with company leaders.³³⁶  Current and former Wal-Mart workers from the company’s Kingman, Arizona, store told Human Rights Watch, however, that it is also utilized to gauge workers’ union sympathies and as another opportunity to warn workers of the potential detrimental consequences of organizing. 

According to Kingman, Arizona, Wal-Mart workers, shortly after the union organizing drive began at the store in 2000, Wal-Mart added to its Grass Roots survey at least one question about unions, asking whether workers would support union formation at the store.³³⁷  Carol Anderson, a former worker at the Kingman, Arizona, facility, commented, however, “Nobody would have said ‘yes’ to the union question. . . .  There are so many people in that store who want a union.  You wouldn’t believe it.  But they are too scared. . . .  Even in the Grass Roots, no one would have said they wanted a union, not if they were smart.”³³⁸  John Weston, an hourly manager in the Kingman, Arizona, TLE, reported that even five years after the organizing efforts in the store began, the Grass Roots survey administered in February 2005 still contained a question asking workers whether they were union supporters.³³⁹

Current and former Kingman, Arizona, Wal-Mart workers also described to Human Rights Watch the meetings that managers held with small groups of workers before and after the Grass Roots surveys and commented that after the organizing drive began at the store, union formation was discussed in those meetings, as well.  Julie Rebai, former lawn and garden department manager, noted, “As part of Grass Roots, [there was a] whole video about the union and Sam’s beliefs.”³⁴⁰  Anderson added, “Every time, there was some discussion of the union.”³⁴¹  She elaborated, “We really started getting scrutinized after the union petition, after it was filed. . . .  Before the Grass Roots thing, they have a meeting.  They polled us: ‘Who has ever been in a union?  Who has family members in a union?’”³⁴²  

Such questioning puts employees in a dilemma.  If they identify themselves, they are suspect.  If they remain silent, the process of intimidation is allowed to continue.

Anderson further explained that during the Grass Roots meetings, management also addressed what “Wal-Mart wouldn’t be able to do for us if [we were] led by a union. . . .  The personal touch that Wal-Mart stood for would be ruined with the union.”³⁴³  John Weston added that he recalled the store manager commenting to workers after the Grass Roots, “‘I came from a union family.  The union is great for certain things, but there is no need for a union here.’  He said he did not feel that anyone in Wal-Mart needed third-party representation. . . .  It would hurt in the retail trade.”³⁴⁴

The Open Door Policy

The company touts its Open Door Policy as a means to address workers’ concerns and cultivate amicable relations between workers and management.  But many current and former workers with whom Human Rights Watch spoke expressed skepticism about its utility and effectiveness. 

At its core, the Open Door Policy is motivated by Wal-Mart’s hostility to worker organizing.  The company implemented the policy in the 1970s at the suggestion of John Tate, who has been described as a “professional union-buster” hired by Sam Walton to devise policies to prevent union formation.³⁴⁵  Wal-Mart’s Manager’s Toolbox clearly states that the company views its Open Door policy as its “greatest barrier to union influences trying to change our corporate culture and union-free status.”³⁴⁶  An NLRB judge confirmed that “[i]t is also beyond doubt that the policy is intended, at least in part, to discourage employees from seeking union representation. . . .  The policy affords [Wal-Mart] the opportunity to tell its employees that ‘third party representation’ is not necessary, as they are allegedly able to bring their concerns directly to management.”³⁴⁷  

Wal-Mart instructs its managers that to achieve the company goal of keeping out that “third party,” they must implement the Open Door Policy, ensuring that “any Associate, at any time, at any level, in any location, may communicate verbally or in writing with any member of management up to the president, in confidence, without fear of retaliation.”³⁴⁸  Wal-Mart warns managers: 

If we do not take care of our Associates’ needs and concerns, our Associates will find someone who will.  And that someone may just be a union representative! . . .  Open communication is the key to stopping a union organizing attempt before it every [sic] gets started.³⁴⁹ 

According to current and former Wal-Mart workers and managers with whom Human Rights Watch spoke, as well as NLRB cases against the company, managers take full advantage of this opportunity, particularly during union organizing drives.³⁵⁰  During the organizing drive at the Kingman, Arizona, Wal-Mart facility, “[a]t virtually every meeting held with groups of employees, [Wal-Mart’s] managers stressed the ‘open door’ policy. . . .  References to the open door policy in material made available to employees can be accurately described as ubiquitous.”³⁵¹  Cory Butcher, a union supporter, also explained that at store meetings during union formation efforts at her Serene Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, Sam’s Club, management “stressed . . . that they had the Open Door Policy if [we] needed to discuss anything. . . .  We’re one big, happy family.  We’re a team.”³⁵²  

Store managers also reportedly began to highlight the Open Door Policy at daily meetings at the Greeley, Colorado, store when they suspected that organizing was underway.  Greeley, Colorado, Wal-Mart worker and member of the organizing committee, Jared West, told Human Rights Watch that managers “kept asking us if things were okay—‘Use the Open Door Policy if you need to talk.’”³⁵³  Scott Smith, former electronics department worker at the store and also a former member of the organizing committee, recounted, “Once even rumors started, . . . they started talking about the Open Door Policy a lot more than they ever had before.”³⁵⁴  Casey Minor, another electronics department worker and organizing committee member, concurred, adding that there was “a lot more discussion about the Open Door Policy.  That’s their main argument.  ‘Why do you need someone to work for you when you have the Open Door Policy?’”³⁵⁵

Members of Wal-Mart’s Labor Relations Team also highlighted the Open Door Policy in the months leading up to the February 2005 union election at the New Castle, Pennsylvania, Tire and Lube Express, according to Jason Ketchel, a TLE technician and union opponent, and “Stan Turner,” his co-worker and fellow union opponent who spoke to Human Rights Watch on condition of anonymity.³⁵⁶  Ketchel explained that Labor Relations Team members told workers:

Wal-Mart has been going . . .  this long without it [a union] with the Open Door Policy, “Why start now?”  There is no reason that associates need a union.  They don’t need representation because if they have concerns, they can go directly to management, and if that doesn’t work, they can go higher up.³⁵⁷

In addition, Wal-Mart managers suggest that with a union, workers could lose the benefits of the Open Door Policy.  “Gail Hass” (a pseudonym), a Spring Mountain Road, Las Vegas, Nevada, Sam’s Club worker and union opponent speaking on condition of anonymity, described to Human Rights Watch the emphasis placed on the Open Door Policy during the organizing drive at her store:

We had people come from Bentonville. . . .  During the meetings, [they said,] “You don’t need unions because people can talk for themselves.  Why would you want to pay union dues because you can speak for yourself?”  They said [that] there’s always the Open Door Policy. . . .  With a union, you lose freedom of speech because the union has to say it for you.³⁵⁸ 

Highlighting Possible Permanent Replacement

Wal-Mart management also highlights the possibility that union formation could ultimately lead to job loss for workers in the event of a strike.  The Manager’s Toolbox explicitly urges managers to “tell associates the law permits the company to permanently replace them if there is a strike.”³⁵⁹  Wal-Mart management follows these clear instructions, according to current and former Wal-Mart workers and NLRB cases against the company.  Though legal under US law, threatening workers with permanent replacement if they strike constitutes impermissible interference in workers’ organizing activity under international standards and thus violates their right to freedom of association. 

In her decision in an NLRB case against Wal-Mart alleging unfair labor practices at the company’s Lake Elsinore, California, store, the administrative law judge found:

Ms. Ruiz, labor relations manager during the critical period, presented union and strike information programs to small groups of TLE employees in mandatory meetings, using computer-generated visuals and handouts.  She followed written notes closely in making her oral presentation.  Respectively, the visuals concerning strikes and the notes read:

Permanent Replacement?

When A Union Strikes To Support Its Contract Demands, It's Called An Economic Strike

Company Could Hire Permanent Replacements

When The Strike Ends, Permanent Replacements Have The Right To Keep Their jobs — Even If The Strikers Want Their Jobs Back!

NOTES:

While the union has the right to call an economic strike, Wal-Mart has the right to keep operating, and that includes the right to hire replacement workers to do the strikers' jobs.

Wal-Mart may or may not hire permanent replacements during a strike, but the company would certainly have to consider its options in keeping the store running and serving our customers.  For example, Wal-Mart could use TLE associates from other stores.

The longer the strike lasted, the more likely it is that Wal-Mart would have to hire permanent replacements.

When the strike ends, the permanent replacements would be entitled to keep their job [sic], even if the strikers wanted their jobs back.³⁶⁰

“Stan Turner,” a worker in the New Castle, Pennsylvania, Wal-Mart Tire and Lube Express speaking anonymously, told Human Rights Watch that shortly before the union election in the TLE in February 2005, Wal-Mart management explained to workers:

If the union can’t come to an agreement, they have the power to have their workers strike, and . . . if you’re a member of the union, you have to go on strike.  You don’t have a choice.  Because Pennsylvania is not a right to work state, if a union comes in, you have to join it because of state law. . . .  If a strike goes on for so long, they are legally allowed to hire in new people, and your job is not guaranteed.  It would be a store-level management decision as to whether [they] want to keep you on if your position wasn’t open.³⁶¹ 

Alicia Sylvia, a worker and union supporter at the Loveland, Colorado, store, also described small, “anti-union” meetings in which management emphasized the possible permanent replacement of striking workers and explained:

If we had a union at Wal-Mart, they [Wal-Mart] would never settle.  They would just let you strike and hire new people. . . .  They don’t have to shut down the store to keep you in a job. . . .  They could hire people in our places to keep the store running.³⁶²

Worker Training

As if harboring fears that its wages, benefits, and working conditions will prompt workers to organize, Wal-Mart frequently begins to communicate its union philosophy to workers as soon as they are hired.  Management often uses new employee training and orientation to impart negative views of organizing and dissuade workers from even considering union formation.  According to current and former Wal-Mart workers with whom Human Rights Watch spoke, new hires often receive information about unions, particularly if the store at which they are hired has been the target of a union organizing campaign.  These new employee programs carry the full weight of the superior-subordinate employment relationship and convey a clear message that management, on whose good graces workers’ livelihoods depend, opposes workers’ self-organization.

Former East Serene Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, Wal-Mart worker and lead union supporter, Larry Allen, told Human Rights Watch that Wal-Mart discussed union organizing with workers during new employee training at his store.  He explained:

Wal-Mart stresses union dues. . . .  Because money was so tight at Wal-Mart, everyone understands money.  That $60 a month in union dues buys you one share of Wal-Mart stock.  They tell [you that] in the early 70’s, an employee bought one hundred shares of stock.  Today, it’s worth millions.  That’s how valuable your money is.  During associate training, [you’re] told [the] line about third-party representation—“We have an Open Door Policy.  You can talk to a manager at any time.  Call our 1-800 number.”³⁶³ 

Carol Anderson and her co-worker and union proponent Gloria Bollinger, two former workers at the Kingman, Arizona, Wal-Mart, also recalled that when they were hired, they were given a card “to carry in our pockets” that told them what to do “if a union person approaches us.”  Anderson explained that the card told them to “call management.”³⁶⁴  Bollinger added, “They don’t want you talking to the union.”³⁶⁵

Marsha Wardingly, a Spring Mountain Road, Las Vegas, Nevada, Sam’s Club worker and union supporter, also recounted that in training sessions and in morning meetings at her store, “as new hires came in, [they] said [we’re] pro-associate, not anti-union. . . .  So, the new hires knew right off the bat that the last [thing] they wanted to do was sign union cards.”³⁶⁶  She added that management stressed the Open Door Policy with the new hires and showed them an “anti-union video from Bentonville” that emphasized “the bad side about unions.”³⁶⁷

Larry Adams, a former TLE worker and union proponent at Wal-Mart’s Kingman, Arizona, store hired after union organizing had begun at the facility, told Human Rights Watch that he also remembered seeing a total of four videos about unions during the hiring process.  He characterized the videos as “anti-union” and summarized them, saying, “[There were] different employees saying why you should stay away from the union. . . .  ‘You don’t need a union because of the Open Door.  Why should you pay a union?  They take part of your salary.’”³⁶⁸  

Josh Noble, a TLE worker and lead union supporter at the Loveland, Colorado, Wal-Mart, also remembered seeing “two to three videos that were anti-union” as part of his new-worker training and orientation.³⁶⁹  He described the videos to Human Rights Watch:

[The videos] would have two workers, and they’d be talking, in uniforms, . . . and one would say, like, “I have a problem,” and would mention the union, and the other employee that was once a union member would say, “Our managers are here for us.  We have the Open Door Policy.”  They’d talk about how great Wal-Mart is at handling problems. . . .  In some videos, they would show union members forcing you to sign union cards, real harassing.  They made union people out to be like mafia characters almost. . . .  [Another video showed] two workers.  The worker who was in the union would say how much he was paid and the amount of union dues he paid and that the dues only went to political connections, like local senators.  They made it look like they were just collecting money from you and would do what they will with it and that it’s not going where you think it’s going.  They would show a pie graph of how much dues a [union] local collected and what it went towards, like 90 percent politics, 10 percent for members, and they’d make comparisons with Wal-Mart and what Wal-Mart does for its employees.³⁷⁰

Greeley, Colorado, Wal-Mart workers and union supporters, Jared West, Scott Smith, and Steve Stockburger, also told Human Rights Watch that they remembered seeing videos about unions during their orientation.  Smith called the videos “anti-union propaganda” and remembered seeing two.³⁷¹  Stockburger commented, “I had always heard of unions in positive ways.  I got the vibe from the video that they are bad organizations.”³⁷²  West elaborated:

It’s part of your orientation.  They start it from there.  They make people wary of the union card. . . .  During orientation, there is a video on unions, and the store manager talks. . . .  The horrors of signing a card—like if you sign a card, it might mean in certain states that they can start deducting union dues.  They’re really vague. . . .  They don’t tell you what states, always very vague and very scary sounding.³⁷³

Larry Allen, a former East Serene Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, Wal-Mart worker, also remembered watching a video about unions during his worker orientation.  He described the video to Human Rights Watch:

The new hires are talking, and one new associate says [he] worked at a union store and how bad it was at the union store.  The new employee says that.  The other new employee says, “Is there a union at Wal-Mart?”  Then . . . Wal-Mart says, “We don’t believe employees at Wal-Mart . . . need third-party representation.  Employees can speak for themselves.”³⁷⁴

Angie Griego, former East Tropicana Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, Wal-Mart worker and lead union supporter at her store, also described to Human Rights Watch the message that new employees at Wal-Mart reportedly often receive about unions during their orientation and training, both through discussions with Wal-Mart managers and videos.  She explained:

From the day you start at Wal-Mart, they have videos that show how bad they [unions] are.  It’s part of associate training.  I saw one video that talks negative about unions.  With the union, the company no longer has the authority to change things.  They put unions as a third party that [is] interrupting the business.  They’re not very nice videos, very intimidating.  They basically make them like cartoons.  This is the big bad wolf that’s going to come in.  [They] brainwash people into thinking unions are bad. . . .  They are very good at telling you how much money you pay into union dues but [that] could be going into employees’ pockets, and you’ll never see that money again, and you don’t have a choice.  You have to pay union dues.  But this is a right-to-work state, and you do have a choice.³⁷⁵

Although Wal-Mart’s videos often put the anti-union broadsides in the mouths of workers, the message is clear that this is Wal-Mart management’s view.  The videos, therefore, carry with them the power of the employment relationship—management’s power to assign work, to pay wages, to provide or withhold benefits, and to impose discipline, up to dismissal.  New Wal-Mart workers see and hear the videos with this power in mind.

A Training Video: “You’ve Picked a Great Place to Work!”

Human Rights Watch viewed one of the new worker training videos about unions, entitled, “You’ve Picked a Great Place to Work!”³⁷⁶  Through a conversation among a human resources manager; two newly hired workers, one of whom is a former union member; and two current workers, one of whom also previously belonged to a union, the video explains Wal-Mart’s philosophy on unions, criticizes unions, and highlights the possible detrimental consequences of union formation.³⁷⁷ 

Among the negative effects of organizing, the video describes: 1) dues that unions spend “to help on political campaigns” for candidates that workers “don’t even vote for”; 2) union work rules that prohibit increased productivity, causing companies to shut down; 3) strikes during which workers may not receive unemployment checks, must pay to keep their benefits, and may be permanently replaced;³⁷⁸ 4) seniority rules that base promotions on “seniority or union politics,” rather than merit; 5) union rules that prohibit members from communicating directly with management and require workers, instead, “to go to your union steward,” who will relay the message to management only “if he likes what you say”; and 6) collective bargaining during which “every benefit . . . could go on the negotiating table” and “unions will negotiate just about anything to get the right to have dues deducted from your paychecks” because “they need the big money to pay union bigwigs and their lawyers.”  After bombarding workers with this one-sided account full of spin, the video concludes with the newly hired worker who formerly belonged to a union stating that after working at Wal-Mart for a time, “All of us, every day, we see how our management listens and cares. . . .  We see how many chances there are to move.  There’s no way we’d want a union to come in.  We could lose a lot of the good things we just talked about.”³⁷⁹

Management Training

Wal-Mart’s treatment of unions in its management training programs is further evidence of how thoroughly and deeply the company’s anti-union strategy is embedded in corporate policies and practices.  All levels of Wal-Mart managers receive instruction on unions as a standard part of their management training.  The training provides managers with tools for preventing workers from mounting organizing drives and for addressing union activity if it occurs at their facilities.  In addition, the training reminds managers of the company’s union philosophy, highlighting the possible negative consequences of union formation and stressing why managers must work to keep unions out of their stores.  NLRB administrative law judges have repeatedly commented on these intensive trainings, legally provided to managers under the wide cover of US labor law.  One judge noted, “[Wal-Mart] provides extensive and detailed guidance to its managers about its policy concerning unionization.”³⁸⁰  Another elaborated:

Management trainees participate in a 16 to 20 week management trainee program that includes working closely with managers and completing a computerized training and testing program. . . .  [Wal-Mart’s] training program instructs management trainees that they are responsible for reporting their knowledge of employees’ union activities to management. . .  Their assigned duties include the obligation to report union activity to upper management and to serve as the “first line of defense” against union organization.³⁸¹

Rene Dunn, a former department manager at the East Tropicana Avenue Wal-Mart in Las Vegas, Nevada, described to Human Rights Watch the management training meeting she attended:

We had to go to a special meeting about unions.  The district manager ran the meeting.  [There were] videos on unions. . . .  The only people in that meeting were hourly management trainees. . . .  We were supposed to report any kind of union activity at all to the assistant manager or manager.  We were supposed to say that that’s your decision but say all the bad things about the union—they’ll take dues; you won’t be able to work overtime; you won’t get any kind of raises or they affect them.³⁸²

“Ellen Frank,” a newly appointed department manager speaking on condition of anonymity, also described to Human Rights Watch a training meeting on unions that she attended in August 2006.  The district manager for her store reportedly led the roughly two-and-a-half hour meeting in the conference room of a nearby hotel, which all new department and assistant managers attended.  “Frank” told Human Rights Watch that the district manager began the meeting by explaining that Wal-Mart was “not anti-union” but “pro-associate,” gave the new managers confidential “little pink cards” describing how to respond to union activity, and showed a video about unions, entitled, “Supervisor Labor Relations Training,” stopping it regularly to comment and elaborate.³⁸³ 

According to “Frank,” the “little pink cards” included on the front “TIPS,” an acronym for the tactics that managers may not legally use and, therefore, should not employ to respond to union organizing, and “FOE,” an acronym for the legal and appropriate management responses to union activity.  TIPS is reportedly short for “threaten, interrogate, promise, and spy,” and FOE for “facts, opinions, and experiences”; managers are reportedly instructed to “state the facts” about unions, share their “personal opinions,” and recount union “experiences.”  “Frank” further explained that on the back of the pink cards are explicit instructions for “how supervisors should respond to associates’ questions concerning unions.”  She summarized the message:

Every time an associate asks you a question concerning a union, it is important that you first thank the associate for coming to you and for asking a question.  State Wal-Mart’s position on unions: it is our belief that associates should not have to pay their hard-earned money to a third party to represent them when they do a great job speaking for themselves.  Answer the question.  If you do not know the answer, tell the associate that you do not know and assure them you will find the answer and get back them shortly.  Then do it.  Report the incident to the store manager.³⁸⁴

“Frank” also described the video on unions to Human Rights Watch, explaining that it included multiple scenarios to teach managers how to implement the instructions on the pink card.³⁸⁵  “Frank” recalled one of the scenarios in which an associate approached a department manager with a union brochure that she found in the break room and the manager ripped the brochure out of her hand and instructed her not to read it.  After the scenario, the district manager reportedly stopped the video to address the managers directly.  “Frank” paraphrased his message: “Always think like an attorney. . . .  Never, ever, ever tear a paper out of somebody’s hand because in a court of law, they could say, ‘They do not like the union and that’s why she ripped it out of her hand.’”³⁸⁶ 

According to “Frank,” the video also depicted the history of unions in the United States.  She explained that it showed that unions began when there were “sweatshop” conditions in US factories and formed “to give workers better working conditions” but are now in decline: “Unionized businesses have had to shut their doors.  Corporate culture has changed and become more focused on employees.”³⁸⁷  

 “Frank” also said that the video highlighted the limitations of unions.  Using language similar to the Manager’s Toolbox, the video reportedly stated, “Unions cannot guarantee better benefits.  They cannot prevent firings.  They cannot guarantee raises. . . .  What they can do is collect dues, fees, and strike.”  The video reportedly also underscored the negative repercussions of union formation.  “Frank” explained that the video depicted workers on strike with picket signs and noted that the company “would get replacement workers” for the strikers.  She added that through short scenarios, the video also asserted that when workers have formed a union, promotions are based on seniority, rather than merit; managers may not assist workers with their jobs because the assistance falls outside managers’ job descriptions; workers “are legally bound to do what the union wants”; and if a union accepts a contract that eliminates important benefits, even if a worker is not a union member and does not want to relinquish the benefit, “once the union votes, it’s too bad” because with a union, “you can no longer represent yourself.”³⁸⁸ 

Liz Boyd, a department manager at the Aiken, South Carolina, Wal-Mart also told Human Rights Watch about a three- to four-hour management training meeting about unions that she, along with other store managers and assistant managers in her district, attended:

We had to attend an anti-union meeting.  They called it a “labor relations meeting” in North Augusta.  We were told that department managers had to report back. . . .  We were told that the union is not necessary—we don’t need a third party—and what your responsibility is as management if you are approached by a union rep in the store.³⁸⁹

Computer-Based Learning Modules

An NLRB administrative law judge noted that in addition to the training videos and meetings, the company legally requires new managers to complete a computer module that includes an “Hourly Supervisor Labor Relations Test.”  According to the judge:              

One question on this test asks what is “Wal-Mart's first line of defense for identifying and stopping union activity.”  The correct answer to that question is the management trainees themselves, “as supervisors.”  The test asks trainees if it is correct that they “should report any and all early warning signs of union activity to your Store Manager.”  The correct answer to this question is “yes,” and the test amplifies the answer by directing the management trainee that, “Any sign or suspicion of union activity should be reported to the Store Manager immediately.”³⁹⁰       

Department manager, Liz Boyd, remembered completing a computer-based learning module about unions as part of her manager training.  She told Human Rights Watch, “We had to do a CBL on unions.  The CBL had sitcoms, an example of a union person in the store giving out cards and what you’re supposed to do.  One question is: ‘If you hear [workers] discussing the union in the break room, what are you supposed to do?’  Anywhere in the store, even the break room, we are supposed to tell management.”³⁹¹  A salaried manager at a Greeley, Colorado, Wal-Mart, who spoke to Human Rights Watch on condition of anonymity, also discussed the computer-based learning module about unions that he said he had to complete when he became a salaried manager:

When I became [salaried] management, . . . you get what to do and how to handle it [union organizing] and who to call and who to go to. . . .  They have CBLs where they put you in studies with associates being approached by union people or other associates regarding the union. . . .  They tell you what to say to associates who come asking about the union.³⁹²

The Union Hotline

Wal-Mart has a Union Hotline to address circumstances in which union activity occurs in a Wal-Mart facility.  The Union Hotline is “a system established so that managers throughout the country can report union activity to headquarters and, in return, receive guidance from labor relations specialists and legal advice from [Wal-Mart’s] legal team, both in-house and outside counsel.”³⁹³  Jim Torgerson, a Wal-Mart district manager who testified in the Aiken, South Carolina, NLRB case against Wal-Mart, said that the Union Hotline is a “resource . . . to use . . . in the event there are any early warning signs of Union activity.”  He noted that “the Manager’s Tool Box is pretty careful to say that whenever any manager sees any indication of organizing activity, [the manager should] report it to the Union Hotline.”³⁹⁴   

The Toolbox instructs managers in bold, “When Union activity Occurs, Call the Union Hotline 501-273-8300.”³⁹⁵  It underscores this message throughout, reiterating, “Immediately after any conversation with a union rep, YOU call the Union Hotline,” and, “In the event you find a union authorization card in your facility or hear Associates are attending union meetings and signing authorization cards, it is imperative you contact the Union Hotline . . . immediately.”  The Toolbox also lists “Early Warning Signs of Union Organizing” and “UNION ACTIVITY CATEGORIES” and instructs managers, “If you suspect any of these early warning signs of union activity are occurring at your facility, call the Union Hotline,” and, “In the event you encounter any of the following activities, or any other type of union activity, contact the Union Hotline . . . as soon as possible.”  The Toolbox tells managers that upon contacting the Union Hotline, “The Labor Team will work with you to develop strategies to combat these and other types of union activities.”³⁹⁶ 

A salaried manager at a Greeley, Colorado, Wal-Mart, who spoke to Human Rights Watch on condition of anonymity, explained, “We have a union activity hotline.  If you hear associates, you don’t confront them.  You or the store manager calls the hotline.  Then higher-up management takes care of it.”³⁹⁷  Liz Boyd, a department manager at the Aiken, South Carolina, Wal-Mart, noted that during the union organizing campaign at her store, “it was our duty as department managers to report any union activity and call the Union Hotline.  Even now, if I hear of a union rumor, I’m supposed to notify management or call the hotline.”³⁹⁸

The “Remedy System”

The Union Hotline is not just a resource for store managers but part of a sophisticated mechanism for gathering and disseminating information about potential or actual organizing activity throughout the company’s US operations.  The labor relations specialists at Wal-Mart headquarters who answer the Union Hotline calls write a summary of each call, including the advice they gave to local managers, which is then entered into the Labor Relations Managers Remedy Procedures database, commonly called the “Remedy System.”³⁹⁹  In-house lawyers review every entry.⁴⁰⁰  The Remedy System is “designed to record union activity incidents, run reports summarizing union activity, and track activity occurrences.”⁴⁰¹  This centralized database allows the company to monitor union activity at its stores throughout the United States, enabling labor relations managers in Arkansas to access information about specific stores and report or update information about facilities.⁴⁰²   

Under the Remedy System, labor relations assistants are required to distribute a “Weekly Union Hotline Report and Memo,” detailing all union activity at stores over the past week, to Labor Relations Team members, regional personnel managers, and “People Directors,” Wal-Mart’s directors of human resources.  On the fifteenth of every month, the labor relations assistant must also provide labor relations managers with the “Monthly LRM Report,” listing “all of their current Open activity in the Division for them to review, update and close.”⁴⁰³  

The Labor Relations Team

When Wal-Mart’s myriad tactics to dissuade workers from launching organizing efforts fail, Wal-Mart responds quickly and aggressively at the highest levels of the company.  According to current and former Wal-Mart workers and managers as well as NLRB documents involving cases against the company, after learning of union activity at a store, usually through the Union Hotline, Wal-Mart sends one or more members of its Labor Relations Team to the facility almost immediately “to combat the union’s organizational efforts.”⁴⁰⁴  As stated in the Manager’s Toolbox, Wal-Mart’s Labor Relations Team works with store management “to develop strategies to combat . . . union activities.”⁴⁰⁵  The team is based at Wal-Mart’s headquarters and is led by a vice president of labor relations and composed of directors of labor relations, senior labor managers, labor managers, project managers, a labor relations coordinator, and assistants.⁴⁰⁶  

When Labor Relations Team members arrive at a store at which union activity is underway, they assume responsibility “for providing training to the . . . facility managers, as well as to managers who arrive[ ] from other locations, on how to combat the Local Union's organizing efforts.”⁴⁰⁷  A department manager at the Aiken, South Carolina, Wal-Mart store, Liz Boyd, recalled for Human Rights Watch, “We were told in a meeting [with Labor Relations Team members] that we were management and that . . . we were the eyes and ears of the store.  We know more of what’s going on than management does, and we were to report activity.”⁴⁰⁸ 

Although the facts and details vary from case to case, Human Rights Watch found that in most cases, Labor Relations Team members also implement many of the strategies outlined in the Toolbox to prevent workers from forming a union.  They “provide education concerning the union to . . . employees, share [Wal-Mart’s] union policy with employees, and are available to demonstrate an interest in employee concerns.”⁴⁰⁹  The Labor Relations Team members meet with workers individually, in small groups, or at all-store meetings to discuss union formation and share with workers the company’s philosophy on unions, often explaining, as in the manager training video described by “Frank,” that unions are antiquated organizations that were a “good thing at one time” but which are now “on [their] way out.”⁴¹⁰  The team members show workers videos or PowerPoint presentations about unions and union-related issues. 

They also often circulate throughout the store, at times engaging in Coaching By Walking Around (CBWA), a company policy that “requires managers to walk through the store and talk with employees, making suggestions to them and receiving feedback on how things could be improved.”⁴¹¹  Workers often perceive such unusual management presence in their work areas as a form of surveillance and deterrent to organizing.  Christine Stroup, a worker at the Greeley, Colorado, Wal-Mart, described to Human Rights Watch how store managers and Labor Relations Team members engaged in CBWA after organizing began at the store in early 2005.  She explained:

If they [store managers] saw a group of us talking, they would come up and say, “What’s going on?  How’s everything going?” . . .  We did it all the time before, and no one ever came up to us. . . .  Before, they would walk the floor once an hour.  After the union letter, it seemed like almost constantly, always someone circling to see what was going on.⁴¹²  

According to Stroup, the Labor Relations Team members continued CBWA after arriving at her store.⁴¹³

Labor Relations Team members also arrived shortly after organizing activity began, were frequently present, held large- and small-group meetings with workers about union formation, and showed videos about organizing in response to union activity at Las Vegas, Nevada, stores between 2000 and 2003, according to current and former Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club workers.⁴¹⁴  Marsha Wardingly, a worker at the Spring Mountain Road, Las Vegas, Nevada, Sam’s Club, told Human Rights Watch that the Labor Relations Team held “mandatory meetings” over the course of several months at which workers watched roughly three or four videos about “how bad the union is and what it means if you sign a union card.”⁴¹⁵  “Fran Gempler,” Wardingly’s co-worker speaking on condition of anonymity, recalled one of the videos, saying:

The video showed good things about [being] non-union and bad [things] with the union.  All the benefits were those without the union.  They said sometimes when you have bargaining, you could get less on this and more on that. . . .  You could lose benefits in the bargaining process.⁴¹⁶

Wardingly added that to demonstrate “how bad the union is,” the videos also used “little scenarios.”  She recounted, “People were dressed up in Wal-Mart uniforms say[ing], ‘Do you think a union is a good idea?  Oh, no, we have our own voice.  We have the Open Door Policy.’”⁴¹⁷  Former Serene Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, Sam’s Club worker Cory Butcher also told Human Rights Watch, “People came in from Bentonville.  There were up to twenty people in the meetings.  They assigned you to groups.”  She described to Human Rights Watch her recollection of one meeting, in particular:

[They were] telling a story about how union personnel raped a woman.  She trusted them and talked to them.  So, women were aghast.  They thought union people were terrible people.  “We can’t talk to them.” . . .  [It was a] room full of women, 95 percent women.  It was a meeting of the demo department.  It touched your emotions.⁴¹⁸

The Labor Relations Team’s tactics have been extremely effective at convincing workers to reject union formation.  For example, Labor Relations Team members arrived at the New Castle, Pennsylvania, Wal-Mart roughly four months before the February 2005 union election in the TLE.  They held small- and large-group meetings and showed videos or PowerPoint presentations in which they presented their anti-union views, after which workers could ask questions.⁴¹⁹  One union opponent at the store told Human Rights Watch that the only information he had about unions “comes from Wal-Mart’s meetings—everything I found out, I found out from work.”  He described why he believed that the union was not in the best interests of Wal-Mart workers:

From the stuff that I’ve heard, . . .  [you] might get a dime raise, but what happens after that?  With Wal-Mart, you get annual raises and [you] might get merit raises, like another quarter.  You could lose benefits.  You might gain something, too, but the majority of the time, you don’t get everything you want. . . .  You can move up.  I think if the union came in, this would change.  You’d pay dues right off the top, but the profit sharing would be gone. . . .  With the union, if you have a problem with Joe Schmoe, you can’t go to management because they won’t listen to you. . . .  Now, if you think you need a raise, you can go to your manager and get a raise.  With a union, you’d have to go to them and they’d negotiate it with the company.⁴²⁰

Dividing the Store

Many workers reportedly become openly hostile to union supporters at their stores as a result of Wal-Mart’s aggressive anti-union campaign and the fear of union formation that it generates.  Although tensions between pro- and anti-union workers on the shop floor are not unusual during union organizing drives, current and former Wal-Mart workers explained to Human Rights Watch that Wal-Mart’s practices at times exacerbate these tensions, further intimidating union supporters.  The result is additional pressure on union supporters to reject the union or, at the very least, to refrain from openly advocating union representation to avoid their co-workers’ hostility. 

Liz Boyd, a department manager at the Aiken, South Carolina, Wal-Mart, explained:

They put people against each other—for or against. . . .  People turned on each other. . . .  People you’d been friends with for years didn’t speak to you because they didn’t want [management] to know you were friends.  Associates did not want to be associated with me because they knew I went to the union meeting.⁴²¹

Marsha Wardingly and “Dina Eldridge,” workers at the Spring Mountain Road Sam’s Club in Las Vegas, Nevada, and Cory Butcher, former worker at the Serene Avenue Sam’s Club nearby, added that during the 2001 union organizing campaigns at their stores, Sam’s Club assigned workers to the groups with which they would attend management- and Labor Relations Team-led meetings and placed union supporters in groups with primarily union opponents.  Wardingly recounted that because pro-union workers at the Spring Mountain Road facility were assigned to “groups of anti-union workers, . . . [there was] no chance to say anything positive.”⁴²²  She added, “Associates would bash the union. . . .  Management would stand back and not get involved and let it happen. . . .  Pro-union [associates] would not defend [the union] because [they were] scared of what would happen.”⁴²³  “Eldridge” elaborated:

They had a whole list of names. . . .  They knew how to put who with who. . . .  They’d get eight or nine [workers] dead against [the union] and one or two who were for and put them in a meeting. . . .  We had the opponents using the “f” word and getting away with it. . . .  They would get strong union believers into conversations about unions to get people there to jump down your throat.  So, at the end, you just sat there and [did] not bother saying anything because it was a waste of time. . . .  Cindy hated the union, and she would stand up at meetings and cuss.  She would stand up and say, “We have great management here.  You’re just fucking stupid.” . . .  Management just let [them] say that and then always agreed with the people against the union.⁴²⁴

Jared West, a Wal-Mart worker in Greeley, Colorado, recounted to Human Rights Watch, “They create a giant rift among associates.  You have union people on one side.”⁴²⁵  He explained how the animosity he felt from his co-workers impacted his participation in store meetings about the union:

The meetings aren’t conducive for us speaking up. . . .  The atmosphere is set up.  The group think is there.  Everything is pro-Wal-Mart.  I’ve tried, but it puts you so far out of the group to try to say anything.  It sounds like you’re whining.  It’s impossible to prove that that’s anything.  They’d say that I have every right to say whatever I wanted to, but . . . group dynamics are more powerful than that.⁴²⁶