King Soopers Union Agreement

| 0

 As previously stated, this case is the result of the relocation of a King Soopers supermarket, Store #8, initially covered by a collective agreement between King Soopers and UFCW Local 7 and Bakery Workers Local 26.   King Soopers objects to the board`s assertion that this collective agreement applied to its moved business, store #86.   We begin our analysis with the established labour law requirement that "the union`s status as the exclusive representative as the exclusive negotiator should not normally be called into question for the duration of a collective agreement."  NLRB v. Marine Optical, Inc., 671 F.2d 11, 16 (1st cir.1982);  see also NLRB v. Rock Bottom Stores, 51 F.3d 366, 370 (2d Cir.1995) (explanation of this legal principle, "aims to promote peace at work by stabilizing a contractual relationship between the employer and the unit for a reasonable period of time");  Westwood Import Co. v. NLRB, 681 F.2d 664, 666 (9th Cir.1982).   This long-standing rule "prohibits employers from petitioning the board of directors for the decertification of a union and from terminating the contract or withdrawing recognition from a union during the term of the collective agreement and refusing to bargain with a union," unless there is evidence of "unusual circumstances."  Rock Bottom, 51 F.3d at 370.   A transfer of employment referred to here is not considered to be the type of "unusual circumstance" preventing the application of this rule.  Indeed, as the third circle acknowledges, each employer would allow to "push the union to the door" if an employer could choose to "modernize its establishment".  Molded Acoustical Prods., Inc. v. NLRB, 815 F.2d 934, 940 (3d Cir.1987).

While details were not immediately released, the union said the new contract involved "wage increases for tens of thousands of families throughout the Western Mountain." The new contracts were designed by Scot Beckenbaugh, the current director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, Washington, at the request of the chains and workers. Under the terms of the pacts, employees must now pay for health insurance coverage — US$5 per week for employees, US$10 for employees and their spouses or children and US$15 for families - and companies will reduce their contributions to jointly managed health funds, the union spokesman told SN. In addition, newcomers will receive slower wage increases. . . .