Union-Busters: Nissan's Illegal Union-Busting Tactics Against the UAW [View All]

UAW Comments on Nissan Vote

Calling today’s loss at Nissan a “setback for Nissan workers,” UAW President Stephen P. Yokich said, “the fact remains that in the global economy, Nissan workers still need and deserve the seat at the decision-making table that only a union can provide. That’s why Nissan workers and other workers can continue to count on the UAW’s support in their efforts to unionize and build brighter futures for themselves and their families.”
“Obviously we’re disappointed that the UAW supporters at Nissan came up short in this election after working so hard and standing up to Nissan’s intense anti-union campaign,” Yokich continued. “Yet, at the same time, we’re proud of the courage and determination they displayed throughout.”

“Make no mistake about it," Yokich added, "this vote does not change the constructive relationships we have with Ford, GM, DaimlerChrysler, NUMMI, Mitsubishi and hundreds of other employers that contribute every day to keeping our middle-class economy strong.”
Commenting on the result, Bob King who heads the union’s Organizing Department, added, “our experience tells us that campaigns like this exert tremendous pressure on employers to maintain higher wages and better benefits for their workers than would otherwise be the case. Whether they know it or not, every Nissan technician owes a debt to the brave Nissan workers who campaign for the union. They are protecting every Nissan worker’s standard of living.”

“There can be no doubt,” King continued, “that Nissan management’s law breaking and campaign of fear and intimidation offers dramatic proof of the tremendous obstacles workers must overcome in the face of a hostile employer.”
“Most people think that union elections are just like the votes American citizens all know for elected officials and ballot propositions,” King explained. “Unfortunately, that is not the case. In this election and in far too many union elections, employers threaten workers with loss of jobs, plant closings, moving to Mexico, loss of wages and benefits, and many other threats. Moreover, unlike political elections where all sides have comparable access to the voters, in union elections, the employer has unlimited workplace access to the workers while unions have no workplace access to workers.”

“Nissan set the wrong tone for this campaign early on,” King said, “when plant manager Daniel Gaudette told workers in an in-plant video message that they should not even talk to UAW supporters. The company also conducted extensive illegal surveillance of Nissan workers who were engaged in leafleting and other pro-union activities in and around the plant. Furthermore, Nissan workers who were perceived by the company as undecided were forced to attend compulsory meetings, often repeatedly, where they were barraged with distorted, misleading and just plain wrong information about the UAW. Every Nissan technician was subjected on a daily basis to company disinformation about everything from Nissan’s relationship with unions in other countries to the basics of Nissan benefits and company policies.”
“That kind of behavior is just plain wrong,” Yokich said.
“We applaud not only the workers for their courageous and positive campaign,” King said, “we thank the religious leaders; the Nashville area community activists who tried to persuade Nissan to agree to a debate on the issues; sports leaders like Frank Wycheck and Gene Upshaw; scores of academics from colleges and universities who signed statements calling for a fair campaign and the trade unionists from throughout Tennessee, the nation and the world who supported this organizing effort. We are confident that all will remain supporters as we bring the story of this election and Nissan’s treatment of its workers here at its Tennessee plants to the attention of the public in the weeks and months ahead.”

UAW Wins Key NLRB Decision Regarding Nissan

The Memphis Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled against Nissan on September 7, 2001, in a decision that also directed a union election for the workers at Nissan’s Smyrna assembly plant. The decision denies Nissan’s attempt to dilute the voting strength of the Smyrna plant workforce by including voters in the election from a separate Nissan facility 80 miles away whose workers had not petitioned for an election.

Specifically the decision said in part, “I conclude that the petitioned for unit, limited to employees at the Smyrna facility is an appropriate unit for purposes of collective bargaining.”

“We hope that Nissan managers who introduced this phony issue in the first place, don’t now take steps to delay the setting of the earliest possible election date,” said Chet Konkle a member of the Volunteer Organizing Committee. “We want a vote as soon as possible, because a majority of Nissan workers want more of a say about their jobs and we know that a union is the best way to get it.”
“A lot of us have been waiting for this chance for a long time,” said Mike Williams, a member of the Nissan Volunteer Organizing Committee and a leader of the 1989 unionization effort at Nissan. “Nissan management has told many workers they want a quick election, and we hope they don’t go back on their word by trying to delay this vote.”