Labor Board Ruling in Favor of Jimmy John’s Workers–A Big Win for Labor

by Eric M. Fink

In a win for labor, an NLRB Administrative Law Judge has ruled that management at a Minneapolis Jimmy John’s franchisee committed multiple unfair labor practices against workers involved in a union organizing effort. The judge ordered the company to reinstate and pay full back wages to six workers who were illegally fired, and to rescind written warnings that were illegally issued to three other workers.

The illegal firings and warnings came in the wake of a campaign by the Industrial Workers of World to organize workers at 10 Jimmy John’s stores operated by the francishee, MikLin Enterprises. In a representation election conducted by the NLRB in October 2010, employees narrowly voted against IWW representation by an 85-87 margin. However, after the IWW filed objections and unfair labor practice charges based on the employer’s pre-election conduct, the union and the company agreed to a settlement under which the IWW may seek a rerun election.

In early 2011, union supporters engaged in action to highlight the demand for paid sick leave. They posted flyers on community bulletin boards in the store, calling attention to the fact that, because of Jimmy John’s personnel policies, workers who are sick are unable to take time off work without losing pay and facing discipline.  Four of the workers then presented the franchise co-owner with a letter from the union, requesting a meeting to discuss the demand for paid sick leave. When the owner refused to meet, union supporters continued to post flyers in Jimmy John’s stores and at various locations around the community.

The franchise owner and store managers responded by tearing down the posted flyers, firing six of the workers involved in the union campaign, and issuing “final written warnings” to three others. Management specifically cited the posters as grounds for the terminations and warnings, claiming the workers were guilty of “disloyalty” to the company and “disparagement” of its products. In addition, managers posted derogatory messages about one union supporter on an anti-union Facebook page. The franchise owner also interrogated at least one store employee about another worker’s pro-union sympathies.

The Administrative Law Judge found that the firings and warnings, along with the removal of posters, the anti-union Facebook postings, and the interrogation, constituted unfair labor practices in violation of the National Labor Relations Act. As a remedy, the judge ordered that the company rehire the six fired workers, with full back-pay, rescind the written warnings, and cease and desist from further illegal anti-union conduct.

While the immediate impact of this case may be limited to a few workers at one shop, the broader ramifications are potentially more significant. The food service sector, which represents a substantial segment of the U.S. workforce, has been especially difficult terrain for union organizing. The “Solidarity Unionism” approach that the IWW has pursued in its Jimmy John’s and Starbucks union campaigns may be especially well-suited to the conditions and labor force in that industry. The victory at Jimmy John’s merits the attention of everyone who cares about the future of the labor movement, and who hopes to see a reversal of fortune for unions and the workers they represent.

Eric Fink is an Associate Professor at Elon University School of Law in Greensboro, North Carolina. He is also a fly-fishing enthusiast and a guitarist.