Post by Okwes on Sept 10, 2006 19:55:51 GMT -5
Indian tribes fight for exemption from federal labor law By ERICA WERNER
www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/15435725.htm?source=rss&channe\
l=thestate_news
<http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/15435725.htm?source=rss&chann\
el=thestate_news> SAN MANUEL INDIAN RESERVATION, Calif. �" Once
steeped in poverty, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians has become
one of the nation’s wealthiest tribes thanks to casino gambling.
Now the Southern California tribe is using its riches to fund a
potentially precedent-setting legal fight contending that tribes are
exempt from federal labor laws because they are sovereign governments. A
ruling against San Manuel could open the door for unions to organize an
estimated 250,000 workers �" dealers, servers, cooks �" at
the nation’s 400-plus tribal casinos. Except for a handful in
California, tribal casinos generally are not unionized. Unions say
it’s difficult to make inroads without the protection of federal
organizing rules. “It’s tremendously significant, because
tribal gaming is a target for labor, one of the significant targets for
labor, and this would significantly open up the ability of labor to
organize,” said Joseph A. Turzi, an attorney who has represented
tribes in labor disputes but isn’t involved in this case. Backed
by many of the country’s leading tribal organizations, San Manuel
is fighting a 2004 opinion by the National Labor Relations Board that
asserted the board’s jurisdiction over tribal businesses. Under
the decision, tribes would be covered for the first time by the National
Labor Relations Act that bars unfair labor practices and gives workers
the rights to organize and bargain with employers.
“They’ve taken the tribe and simply defined us as an
employer instead of a government, which we are,” said San Manuel
vice chairman Vincent Duro. “That is, to me, really outrageous.
The erosion in and of tribal sovereignty is a serious threat.”
The case is before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit, where oral arguments are expected in coming months.
Both sides believe the matter could end up before the U.S. Supreme
Court. “It’s that kind of a case,” said David
Fleischer, senior attorney with the labor board, which has been joined
in the case by the state of Connecticut and the Unite Here
hotel-and-restaurant union, based in New York. Once little more than
brush-covered hills and palm trees 60 miles east of Los Angeles, the
800-acre San Manuel reservation now has attractive new office buildings
and freshly landscaped homes. A booming $300 million casino, featuring
2,000 slot machines, opened last year and employs more than 2,500
people. The 180-member tribe could add 5,500 more slots under a deal
just approved by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that’s awaiting
approval by California lawmakers. San Manuel officials said the
tribe’s success shows Indian gambling is improving economic
conditions for Indians �" just as Congress intended. The National
Labor Relations Board argues that casino-owning tribes have started
behaving more like traditional businesses than sovereign governments and
should be treated as such. “Running a commercial business is not
an _expression of sovereignty in the same way that running a tribal
court system is,” the labor board said in its opinion, approved
by a 3-1 vote. The litigation stems from a 1998 complaint filed with the
labor board by Unite Here, then known as Here, that accused San Manuel
of denying the union an opportunity to organize while allowing access by
another union, the Communications Workers of America, which now has a
contract to represent most workers at the casino. The tribe claimed the
labor board had no jurisdiction in the matter because of tribal
sovereignty. In its 2004 opinion, the board disagreed, dismissing as
inadequate past board decisions to largely stay out of tribal affairs.
Tribes around the country generally don’t operate under state or
federal labor regulations. California is unique, because state-approved
compacts authorizing tribal casinos include a Tribal Labor Relations
Ordinance that’s far more extensive than rules in other states.
But even California’s rules are considered weak by union
activists, because they don’t permit picketing on tribal land and
allow strikes only after a bargaining impasse. Most private-sector
employees can strike at will. “Workers are left without weapons
to be able to force an employer who wants to fight unionization,”
said Jack Gribbon, political director for Unite Here in California. Even
though San Manuel already has allowed unionization of many workers, a
win by the National Labor Relations Board would undercut the
tribe’s authority to deal with the union on the tribe’s
own terms. The tribe’s initial contract with the Communications
Workers of America included a no-strike clause and language emphasizing
tribal sovereignty and the tribe’s right to determine just cause
in firing workers. Labor rules at California tribal casinos have
recently become an issue in the state Legislature, with unions prodding
lawmakers to demand stiffer labor protections in new gambling
agreements. Some tribes have passed their own labor rules. At
Connecticut’s two huge casinos, the Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods,
which together employ more than 20,000 people, workers are prohibited
from striking, said Connecticut Assistant Attorney General Richard
Sponzo. Tribes contend that their workers are treated well and that
tribes are capable of dealing with labor issues themselves. A half-dozen
San Manuel employees recently interviewed at the casino praised working
conditions. “They have really good benefits. It’s a good
place to work,” said union member Joshua Velasco, 22, a poker
room server who’s worked at the casino for more than three years.
Workers at some casinos without unions complain about conditions and say
more protection is needed. “There are no laws, absolutely no
laws, to protect me and my co-workers, because we’re on tribal
land,” said Denise De Groff, a 51-year-old maintenance engineer
at the Agua Caliente casino in Palm Springs, Calif. Tribes fear more
than labor rules are at stake in the San Manuel case. In addition to
fighting the National Labor Relations Board in court, they’re
backing legislation in Congress to overturn the board’s ruling.
Tribes reason that a court decision in favor of the labor board could
lead to limits on tribal sovereignty in other areas of federal law.
“Any time they take something away,” said Duro, the tribal
vice chairman, “we never get it back.”
www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/15435725.htm?source=rss&channe\
l=thestate_news
<http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/15435725.htm?source=rss&chann\
el=thestate_news> SAN MANUEL INDIAN RESERVATION, Calif. �" Once
steeped in poverty, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians has become
one of the nation’s wealthiest tribes thanks to casino gambling.
Now the Southern California tribe is using its riches to fund a
potentially precedent-setting legal fight contending that tribes are
exempt from federal labor laws because they are sovereign governments. A
ruling against San Manuel could open the door for unions to organize an
estimated 250,000 workers �" dealers, servers, cooks �" at
the nation’s 400-plus tribal casinos. Except for a handful in
California, tribal casinos generally are not unionized. Unions say
it’s difficult to make inroads without the protection of federal
organizing rules. “It’s tremendously significant, because
tribal gaming is a target for labor, one of the significant targets for
labor, and this would significantly open up the ability of labor to
organize,” said Joseph A. Turzi, an attorney who has represented
tribes in labor disputes but isn’t involved in this case. Backed
by many of the country’s leading tribal organizations, San Manuel
is fighting a 2004 opinion by the National Labor Relations Board that
asserted the board’s jurisdiction over tribal businesses. Under
the decision, tribes would be covered for the first time by the National
Labor Relations Act that bars unfair labor practices and gives workers
the rights to organize and bargain with employers.
“They’ve taken the tribe and simply defined us as an
employer instead of a government, which we are,” said San Manuel
vice chairman Vincent Duro. “That is, to me, really outrageous.
The erosion in and of tribal sovereignty is a serious threat.”
The case is before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit, where oral arguments are expected in coming months.
Both sides believe the matter could end up before the U.S. Supreme
Court. “It’s that kind of a case,” said David
Fleischer, senior attorney with the labor board, which has been joined
in the case by the state of Connecticut and the Unite Here
hotel-and-restaurant union, based in New York. Once little more than
brush-covered hills and palm trees 60 miles east of Los Angeles, the
800-acre San Manuel reservation now has attractive new office buildings
and freshly landscaped homes. A booming $300 million casino, featuring
2,000 slot machines, opened last year and employs more than 2,500
people. The 180-member tribe could add 5,500 more slots under a deal
just approved by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that’s awaiting
approval by California lawmakers. San Manuel officials said the
tribe’s success shows Indian gambling is improving economic
conditions for Indians �" just as Congress intended. The National
Labor Relations Board argues that casino-owning tribes have started
behaving more like traditional businesses than sovereign governments and
should be treated as such. “Running a commercial business is not
an _expression of sovereignty in the same way that running a tribal
court system is,” the labor board said in its opinion, approved
by a 3-1 vote. The litigation stems from a 1998 complaint filed with the
labor board by Unite Here, then known as Here, that accused San Manuel
of denying the union an opportunity to organize while allowing access by
another union, the Communications Workers of America, which now has a
contract to represent most workers at the casino. The tribe claimed the
labor board had no jurisdiction in the matter because of tribal
sovereignty. In its 2004 opinion, the board disagreed, dismissing as
inadequate past board decisions to largely stay out of tribal affairs.
Tribes around the country generally don’t operate under state or
federal labor regulations. California is unique, because state-approved
compacts authorizing tribal casinos include a Tribal Labor Relations
Ordinance that’s far more extensive than rules in other states.
But even California’s rules are considered weak by union
activists, because they don’t permit picketing on tribal land and
allow strikes only after a bargaining impasse. Most private-sector
employees can strike at will. “Workers are left without weapons
to be able to force an employer who wants to fight unionization,”
said Jack Gribbon, political director for Unite Here in California. Even
though San Manuel already has allowed unionization of many workers, a
win by the National Labor Relations Board would undercut the
tribe’s authority to deal with the union on the tribe’s
own terms. The tribe’s initial contract with the Communications
Workers of America included a no-strike clause and language emphasizing
tribal sovereignty and the tribe’s right to determine just cause
in firing workers. Labor rules at California tribal casinos have
recently become an issue in the state Legislature, with unions prodding
lawmakers to demand stiffer labor protections in new gambling
agreements. Some tribes have passed their own labor rules. At
Connecticut’s two huge casinos, the Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods,
which together employ more than 20,000 people, workers are prohibited
from striking, said Connecticut Assistant Attorney General Richard
Sponzo. Tribes contend that their workers are treated well and that
tribes are capable of dealing with labor issues themselves. A half-dozen
San Manuel employees recently interviewed at the casino praised working
conditions. “They have really good benefits. It’s a good
place to work,” said union member Joshua Velasco, 22, a poker
room server who’s worked at the casino for more than three years.
Workers at some casinos without unions complain about conditions and say
more protection is needed. “There are no laws, absolutely no
laws, to protect me and my co-workers, because we’re on tribal
land,” said Denise De Groff, a 51-year-old maintenance engineer
at the Agua Caliente casino in Palm Springs, Calif. Tribes fear more
than labor rules are at stake in the San Manuel case. In addition to
fighting the National Labor Relations Board in court, they’re
backing legislation in Congress to overturn the board’s ruling.
Tribes reason that a court decision in favor of the labor board could
lead to limits on tribal sovereignty in other areas of federal law.
“Any time they take something away,” said Duro, the tribal
vice chairman, “we never get it back.”