“Top Chef” is one of my favorite
shows, and because of my last post on a legal victory against union
hardball tactics, this story
out of Boston caught my eye.
Mark Harrington, a former official of Teamsters Local 25
pled guilty to federal extortion charges in connection with union threats of
physical violence and production disruption against the cast and crew of the
top-rated culinary reality show because they were using non-union workers. Charges
are still pending against four other union members, who have entered pleas of
not guilty. Bean Town politics also are entangled in the case. In a separate
but related federal indictment, Boston’s
head of tourism is accused of withholding permits for Top Chef to film in the
area and calling local restaurants that were scheduled to host the show, and threatening
them that they would be picketed by the union if they did not withdraw the
invitations.
After the union officials were initially indicted
in 2015, Local 25 argued that they were not engaged in criminal activity, but were
instead engaged in the protected concerted activity of picketing, as allowed
for under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). However federal prosecutors fired back that
the union defendants were not entitled to collective bargaining rights because
they did not have a collective bargaining agreement with the Top Chef
production company, and the positions they were seeking for union members
already were filled by non-union employees.
The ugly facts of this case make it clear that what occurred was not protected union activity
under the NLRA. As noted by U.S. Attorney Carmen
M. Ortiz at the time of the September 25, 2015 indictments:
In the course of
this alleged conspiracy, they managed to chase a legitimate business out of the
City of Boston and then harassed the cast and crew when they set up shop in
Milton. This kind of conduct reflects poorly on our city and must be addressed
for what it is – not union organizing, but criminal extortion.
Here is what happened. In June 2014, Top Chef came to Boston to film the twelfth season of the show. This included Top Chef host Padma Lakshmi. Following the threats against Boston restaurants, they withdrew their offers to host the filming of the show, and Top Chef decided to move their production plans to a well-known restaurant in nearby Milton, Massachusetts. During the production of the show, Local 25 members picketed the restaurant, physically roughed up members of the production crew, and slashed the tires of fourteen production workers.
From the picket line outside the Milton restaurant, the
members of Local 25 screamed racist, sexist and homophobic threats and slurs
for hours as production crew and cast came and went. Some of the worst conduct was directed toward
the show’s host. When Lakshmi arrived at the scene, one of the union members
rushed her car and screamed “We’re gonna bash that pretty face in, you f***ing
whore!” In responding to local media
reports of the incident at the time, a Local 25 spokeswoman stated, “As far as we’re concerned, nothing
happened.”
The indictment a year later charged the union members
with using violent tactics in an attempt to extort jobs from Top Chef under the
threat of disrupting or shutting down production. By agreeing to plead guilty, Harrington, who
was the former Secretary-Treasurer of Local 25, received a deal in which he
will receive no prison time and will spend no more than two years of
probation. The maximum sentence
available was up to 20 years in prison and fines of up to $250,000. The other union members still await trial.
According to media reports, this is not atypical behavior
for Local 25. Other union members have
previously been convicted of money-laundering, extortion, racketeering and
shaking down movie producers who tried to film in Boston. The union is politically active, and has made
campaign donations to Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh, a former union attorney,
every member of the Boston City Council, and Attorney General Maura Healey.
The good news in this case is that the U.S. Department of
Justice took action against obviously criminal and terrorizing action by the
union, but the bad news is that the relative “slap on the wrist” no jail-time sentence
of Harrington is unlikely to prove much of a deterrent to such abusive union
activity in the future. There is no indication as to what, if any, involvement the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") had in the case.
In light of the NLRB’s recently
announced joint employer standard for franchise operations, an interesting perspective on
the Top Chef incident was offered in an article by the Competitive Enterprise
Institute entitled “Why Isn't
There a Joint Union Standard?”
According to the author:
The NLRB argued in the majority that companies
utilize common business relationships—franchising, contracting and temporary
staff—to insulate themselves from labor violations and collective bargaining
responsibilities.
Seemingly, if corporations are deemed liable for
the wrongdoings of an entity that they voluntarily associate with and may reserve control over, then
why are labor unions insulated from liability when union officials commit
criminal acts when pursuing union objectives—in this case, obtaining work?
Also, why is a national union shielded from liability when local unions commit
criminal acts?
A national union, in essence, acts in a similar
fashion as a franchisor of labor services. National unions let local unions use
its brand, “provide
services to their locals, such as legal advice and leadership training” and help negotiate collective bargaining
agreements.
As they might say on Top Chef, food for thought.
A MESSAGE TO READERS OF "THE EMPLOYEE WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO"
A reader of this blog asked if she could be included on an e-mail list for new posts. I currently do not have an e-mail service but it seems like an excellent idea and I will be setting it up in the very near future. If you would like to be included, please send your name, your company, and your e-mail to me at fijmanm@phelps.com
Thanks!
Thanks!
