<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) &#187; 2 Sisters Food Group</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ufcw.org/tag/2-sisters-food-group/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ufcw.org</link>
	<description>a VOICE for working America</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Oct 2013 18:42:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>UFCW Statement on the Proposed NLRB Rule that would Standardize the Representation Election Process</title>
		<link>http://www.ufcw.org/2011/06/21/ufcw-statement-on-the-proposed-nlrb-rule-that-would-standardize-the-representation-election-process/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ufcw.org/2011/06/21/ufcw-statement-on-the-proposed-nlrb-rule-that-would-standardize-the-representation-election-process/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 12:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFCW</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economic Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Organizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Packing and Processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Press Releases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UFCW Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UFCW Values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on Workers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2 Sisters Food Group]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ufcw.org/2011/06/21/ufcw-statement-on-the-proposed-nlrb-rule-that-would-standardize-the-representation-election-process/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The proposed rule from the National Labor Relations Board comes down to basic fairness on the job. When workers choose to vote to form a union on the job, the vote shouldnt be plagued by delays, bureaucracy or obstacles. Working people are already struggling. And, theyre waiting and wondering when the economy will recover to a point that therell be enough stable, middle class jobs in their communities.  They shouldnt have to struggle to get a union voice on the job. They shouldnt have to wait and wonder when theyll get justice on the job.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today&#8217;s proposed rule from the National Labor Relations Board comes down to basic fairness on the job. When workers choose to vote to form a union on the job, the vote shouldnt be plagued by delays, bureaucracy or obstacles. Working people are already struggling. And, theyre waiting and wondering when the economy will recover to a point that therell be enough stable, middle class jobs in their communities.  They shouldnt have to struggle to get a union voice on the job. They shouldnt have to wait and wonder when theyll get justice on the job.</p>
<p>Just ask the workers at the 2 Sisters Food Group plant in Riverside, California. When a majority decided they wanted a union voice in their workplace, their employer used the lengthy timeline of the NLRB election process to mount a vicious harassment and intimidation campaign. Instead of investing in their workforce, they hired anti-worker consultants. They distributed anti-union flyers. They forced attendance at daily anti-union meetings. They insisted on including leads who appeared to be supervisors in the unit, which workers agreed to, in order to avoid a lengthy pre-election litigation delay.</p>
<p>As Election Day neared, bosses escalated their campaign by hiring uniformed security guards to monitor the comings and goings of every worker. They illegally fired five workers for their union support-one just a week before the election. When the voting came, off-shift workers were forced to wait at a parking lot gate and then personally escorted one by one to the ballot box by the company CEO, then escorted off company grounds.</p>
<p>The harassment, intimidation and illegal firings were too much.  Workers feared for their livelihoods, and they narrowly lost their bid for a union.</p>
<p>Todays proposed rule is an acknowledgment that the pressure and bullying 2 Sisters workers encountered shouldnt happen in an American workplace or at an American ballot box. American workers have the right to vote on whether to form a union; and the election process should be straightforward and streamlined; it shouldnt involve long delays nor require workers to navigate a legal maze.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ufcw.org/2011/06/21/ufcw-statement-on-the-proposed-nlrb-rule-that-would-standardize-the-representation-election-process/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.515 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2013-10-16 21:28:42 -->