Neither side will say, however, how they will determine whether Beef Northwest workers want to join union

Beef Northwest and the United Farm Workers union jointly announced a settlement Thursday in their 18-month-long dispute over how Beef Northwest workers will decide whether they want to join the union.

“I am a little relieved,” said Jim Wilson, an owner of Beef Northwest, which is headquartered in North Powder and employs about 85 workers at three feedlots, in Boardman, Nyssa and in Quincy, Wash.

“The agreement is predicated on a mutually agreed upon process by which

certain Beef Northwest employees will decide if they want union

representation,” Wilson said in the statement.

When asked to describe that process, Wilson said the company and the union agreed not to go into detail.

Wilson did express his appreciation for the support his company

received Country Natural Beef, the cooperative that includes 16

ranchers in Baker County.

Country Natural Beef sends its cattle to Beef Northwest’s Boardman feedlot.

“Beef Northwest is extremely greatful for all the support we got from

CNB through this process,” Wilson said. “This agreement will help

sustain that relationship with CNB.”

The dispute has revolved around whether a union card count, a secret

ballot vote or some other process would be used to measure feedlot

workers’ support or opposition to joining the union.

Country Natural Beef members had scheduled elections for this weekend at each of the three feedlots.

On Thursday, after receiving word of the settlement, between Beef

Northwest and the UFW, CNB canceled the elections, said Stacy Davies, a

spokesman for the cooperative.

“We greatly appreciate the patience and support of our retail partners during the past trying 18 months,” Davies said.

He also expressed appreciation to Ecumenical Ministries for helping negotiate the agreement.

Continued from Page 1A

He said Country Natural Beef and its retail partners “adamantly support

the rights of the workers of Beef Northwest to be or not to be

represented by a union, whichever is their wish.”

“Because we are not a direct party to this dispute, we have no

knowledge of the details of this settlement, but are hopeful that it

represents the workers’ desire,” Davies said. “Our empathy has always

been with the worker in this dispute.”

Currently, the National Labor Relations Act and The Fair Labor

Standards Act govern the treatment of employee’s in all industries

except agriculture.

That omission is at the heart of the labor dispute between Beef

Northwest, the UFW and second parties like Country Natural Beef, Davies

said.

While both the secret ballot election preferred by CNB and the card

check preferred by UFW provide polls of workers, Davies said neither of

the two processes has legal standing because union organizing targeting

agriculture worker is not regulated under the National Labor Relations

Act.

For industries that are covered by the National Labor Relations Act,

the process for determining union representation involves a card count

as well as a secret ballot election.

A union card count is used to determine preliminary interest of workers

in being represented by a union. Once 30 percent of the workers sign

cards, the NLRB governs the process, which includes campaigning,

followed by a secret ballot election.

Without laws establishing a process and defining activities as legal or

illegal, Davies said unions are free under common law to engage in

boycotts, picketing and email, phone and fax campaigns targeting an

employer, as well as secondary boycotts targeting their customers.

In the absence of NLRB regulations, Davies said the victims of such

second or third party actions have little recourse except to file

lawsuits claiming slander, extortion, or interference with contractual

business activities.

He said CNB will continue working with others to tailor specific

legislation extending collective bargaining laws that governing most

other industries to the agricultural industry.

“The absence of collective bargaining laws governing agricultural

workers leaves a void wherein unfairness abounds,” Davies said.

“Workers who want to organize have no mechanism to do so.

“Unions who are asked to assist workers have no effective method to

engage the employer. The employer has no rules to follow and any

activity they perform is portrayed as union busting,” Davies said.

“Customers of the employer become subject to intense economic pressures.

“The current situation is uniformly unfair for the worker, the union,

the employer and third parties, and it invokes discontent and chaos,”

Davies said.