AUT: Low-Wage Workers Block Company's Move to Mexico

["miranda ibarra" <chimuntrufias@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wednesday, November 22, 2000, Los Angeles Times

Low-Wage Workers Block Company's Move to Mexico

By NANCY CLEELAND, Times Staff Writer

     Through determination and pluck, a few dozen immigrant production
workers have achieved what years of wrangling by labor leaders and
anti-globalization activists have not: They stopped a factory from moving to
Mexico.
     U.S. District Judge Carlos R. Moreno sided with the newly unionized
workers Tuesday, handing down an astonishing preliminary injunction that
prevents a Gardena jewelry manufacturer from going through with a planned
relocation to Tijuana.
     Quadrtech Corp., which employs about 120 minimum-wage assemblers, was
also ordered to bring back two truckloads of equipment it had already
shipped
south.
     The injunction, which was sought by the National Labor Relations Board,
will remain in effect until the NLRB rules on dozens of charges filed by the
union, a process that could take years.
     The most serious is an allegation that business owner Vladimir Reil
planned his move only to avoid dealing with the Communications Workers of
America, the union that represents the workers.
     In granting the injunction, the judge found that the workers were
likely
to win the NLRB case, which would force Reil to remain and bargain in good
faith. The company can appeal.
     The tale of the minimum-wage jewelry assemblers, who began fighting in
May for better working conditions after a supervisor refused to give an
injured worker a chair, illustrates that even in a time of momentous
economic
shifts, individual employees have some power.
     But the rarity of the court order--and the shock it elicited from
business and labor leaders across the nation--also underscores the
difficulties workers face in turning that power into tangible gains.
     Hundreds of thousands of production jobs have been moved to Mexico and
other low-wage countries over the last decade. Threatening such a move has
become a common reaction to a union organizing campaign, although the tactic
is illegal.
     A survey of more than 100 businesses by two Cornell University
researchers in 1996 found that half responded to union organizing drives by
threatening to close or move to a low-wage country. In one case, the
employer
prominently posted a map of North America with a large red arrow pointing to
Mexico.
     It is rare, however, that a union fights the move and rarer still that
the federal government backs the union in a court case. The injunction
issued
Tuesday was the first of its kind in the Los Angeles region, and perhaps the
nation. Nationally, the NLRB has gone to court to stop employers from
anti-union activity fewer than 100 times a year for most of the last decade.
     "It is unusual, far too unusual given how often it happens," said John
Hiatt, general counsel for the AFL-CIO. "If a company's got a smart lawyer,
they can usually avoid it pretty easily."
     Reil did not respond to numerous phone calls, and his attorney, Gregory
G. Kennedy, said only that he was "not authorized to comment." In court
briefs, Quadrtech attorneys argued that the move--announced one day after
the
union was certified to represent workers--was motivated by "purely economic
reasons."
     Several business groups reacted to the ruling with disbelief. "It's
astounding. It's terrible," said Gino De Carlo, spokesman for the California
Manufacturers Assn., adding that the employer's motives for moving should
not
be relevant. "Whatever reason he had for it, it's his own company."
     Workers at Quadrtech, most of whom are long-term employees and earn the
state minimum wage of $5.75 an hour, were relieved to keep their jobs, which
had been scheduled to end this month.
     But several said working conditions have deteriorated since the union
election in October. Production speeds are faster and supervisors have
imposed arbitrary rules, such as a ban on conversation. They believe those
conditions won't improve until they sign their first union contract.
     "We're pleased with [the injunction]. It's a win. But we're too tired
to
celebrate," said Sonia Avalos, who has assembled earrings and other jewelry
for six years. "It's very difficult. We can stand it only a little while
longer. . . .
     "What we want is that the factory stays here, and they give us a raise
and treat us like people."
     Other workers--mainly women from Mexico and Central America--described
a
physically punishing environment. Some assembled as many as 1,700 rings and
studs used for body-piercing a day. Temperatures were maintained above 90
degrees to facilitate working the metal. Some employees were forced to stand
for an entire 10-hour shift.
     "I was with the company 18 years, and I never made more than the
minimum
wage," said Luz Maria Venegas, who is off work on disability leave with a
bad
back. A shipping clerk, she lifted packages weighing up to 50 pounds.
     With limited educations and English skills, the workers said their
options were limited. Many family members worked the line together.
     Years of fast-paced assembly or heavy lifting caused back, hand and leg
injuries, and a growing discontent, the workers said. The final straw came
in
May, when a worker who had developed a fungal infection in her feet asked
for
a chair. According to other employees, she was sent home.
     A worker who protested the action was also told to leave. Eventually
the
entire plant walked out and called the International Union of Electricians,
a
familiar presence among low-wage immigrant workers. That union later merged
with the CWA.
     By July, the workers had voted to join the union, by a 95% margin. It
was an exceptionally speedy vote and drew an equally speedy response: Reil's
announcement that he would lay off the entire work force by Nov. 20 and move
his operation to Mexico.
     The union immediately filed a complaint with the NLRB. At one point,
two
workers followed a truckload of equipment to a vacant Tijuana building,
taking pictures to document the move.
     Believing it had a strong case, the NLRB last month filed for and won a
temporary restraining order against Quadrtech.
     "If we didn't go into federal district court, they would have laid off
employees and moved," said Julie B. Gutman, the lead NLRB attorney who
sought
the injunction. "Then by the time the administrative process completed
itself
and there was a board order, years down the line, by then employees would
have scattered to the four winds."
     Union representative Felipe Aguirre said he hopes the members can set a
precedent for other low-wage workers. "These are people you would think of
as
the most vulnerable--single mothers, immigrants, people struggling to get by
on the minimum wage. But they were strong. The most important thing is, they
lost the fear of what could happen to them."

_______________________________________________



_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com



     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---