Judge to Hear Whether LMCU Violated Former Employee’s Labor Union Rights
Michigan’s largest CU says it will “aggressively defend” itself against unfair labor practices allegations at a March hearing.
A National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge will hear arguments in March as to whether Michigan’s largest credit union violated the labor rights of a former employee who successfully led the organization of a labor union with the Communication Workers of America (CWA).
NLRB Regional Director Elizabeth Kewin in Detroit issued an unfair labor practices (ULP) complaint earlier this month against the $12.9 billion Lake Michigan Credit Union in Caledonia for allegedly violating the labor rights of Ivan Diaz, who led efforts to organize the LMCU Workers’ Alliance. LMCU denied this allegation and claimed he was fired for allegedly violating the credit union’s internal policies.
On Jan. 6, seven employees, including Diaz, at the LMCU’s south division branch in Wyoming voted in favor of forming a union with the CWA to bargain for better working conditions, pay and benefits. Five employees voted against unionizing during an NLRB election. Diaz was a former member services representative who worked at the credit union for nearly five years.
After Diaz was fired in February, the CWA filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB against LMCU for illegally firing Diaz. The unfair labor practice charge alleged the credit union terminated him for his participation in the labor union “in order to discourage union activities and/or membership.” The unionized employees demanded that Diaz’s termination be revoked and that other employees wouldn’t be fired for their involvement in union organizing.
LMCU flatly denied the allegations made by Diaz and the CWA, saying they are inaccurate, unfounded and disappointing.
“We respect the rights of employees to organize, and we look forward to a productive relationship with the union recently formed at one of our branches,” LMCU said in a statement in February. “Our members entrust us to protect their investments, and we expect every one of our employees to uphold the highest standards of compliance with all state and federal laws. We will always do what is right to help and protect our members and ensure that our employees have a working environment where they can contribute and thrive.”
Nevertheless, an NLRB investigation determined that LMCU allegedly fired Diaz because he assisted the CWA and engaged in “concerted activities,” according to the Dec. 7 NLRB Complaint and Notice of Hearing document.
The document also stated that “respondent (LMCU) has been discriminating in regard to the hire, or tenure of term of condition of employment of its employees, thereby discouraging membership in a labor organization in violation of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the (National Labor Relations) Act.”
The law states that employers may not threaten employees with adverse consequences if they engage in protected, concerted activity, which is protected under federal labor law when it concerns employees’ interests. However, an employee engaged in otherwise protected, concerted activity may lose this protection under the law through misconduct.
In response to the NLRB complaint and hearing notice, LMCU said it will make its arguments before the administrative law judge.
“The NLRB recently filed a Complaint against LMCU, alleging that it unlawfully discharged one of its former employees. This complaint has not yet been adjudicated, and there is no finding of a violation,” LMCU said in a prepared statement. “At this time, these are simply allegations, which LMCU will be aggressively defending. We take immense pride in the way we treat our employees, and want to ensure that our employees, members and the communities we serve know we are always striving to exceed their expectations.”
The NLRB complaint is seeking that the termination of Diaz be rescinded and that any discharge documents be expunged from his employment records. The complaint also is seeking that Diaz’s employment be reinstated to his former position and that he be made whole for any loss of wages and benefits.