By Roland Murphy for AZBEX
AZBEX has been looking into the efforts and actions of labor union Unite Here and its affiliated group Worker Power Institute to influence major Arizona development projects for several months. We were simultaneously happy and a tad bit surprised to see the Arizona Republic article, which we have summarized below, hit the street this past weekend before our own inquiries were concluded to our satisfaction. Be on the lookout for our findings in an upcoming article.
The Republic’s Dec. 14 article reports Unite Here Local 11, a union representing service workers in Arizona and southern California, has secretly attempted to press Axon into accepting unionization agreements related to its corporate campus master plan in north Scottsdale.
Axon’s plan would build a new corporate headquarters, approximately 1,900 apartments, a hotel and seven restaurant spaces near Mayo Blvd. and Hayden Road.
Unite Here has denied having any contact with Axon. Axon, however, provided the Republic with a “neutrality proposal” issued by the union establishing conditions under which it would not oppose the company’s development efforts if Axon allowed Unite Here to unionize employees in the development’s relevant components.
Axon has not agreed to the request. The Republic quoted company spokesperson David Leibowitz as saying, “It certainly feels like there’s some quid pro quo being requested here. Axon is being asked to do all of these things, and in return, they’ve basically been told this particular group will not harass you.”
Background
Axon has been proposing a new corporate headquarters for several years. It subsequently added a master plan to that endeavor after purchasing an industrially zoned site in north Scottsdale. That site had restrictions against multifamily development, and Axon later agreed to increase its purchase price to reflect the higher-than-initially-appraised land value if multifamily were to be included.
The original plan encountered significant local resistance, and Axon revised the project proposal to accommodate opponents’ major concerns.
The associated zoning requests and development agreements were approved by Scottsdale City Council on a 5-2 vote last month, with Barry Graham and Kathy Littlefield voting no.
Several people spoke out against the plan at the Council meeting. At least two of the speakers were members or representatives of the Unite Here-affiliated group Worker Power Institute. Worker Power is generally regarded as Unite Here’s public outreach and political action associate, although the two are legally distinct and separate organizations.
As has been reported both in AZBEX and elsewhere, shortly after the approval vote former Councilmember Bob Littlefield, husband of current Councilmember Kathy Littlefield, established a group to collect signatures for a petition seeking a referendum to overturn Council’s decision. His group, Taxpayers Against Awful Apartment Zoning Exemptions, also known as TAAAZE, has been using volunteers and paid staff to collect signatures door-to-door and outside local businesses. The group or its associates have also rented office space where people wanting to sign the petition can come by. (AZBEX, Dec. 13)
Bob Littlefield has declined to answer questions about how TAAAZE is funded and said that information will be available when the group files its campaign finance report in January, after the signature collection and submission deadline has passed.
He is quoted in the Republic article as saying Unite Here promised not to launch its own signature collection or petition efforts so as not to draw away from TAAAZE’s ability to collect signatures. He also said the union has not provided any funds for his group, but he did not know if Unite Here canvassers were trying to collect signatures.
The Unite Here Demands
Unite Here Spokesperson Victoria Stahl told the Republic on Dec. 4 that the union had no contact with Axon. The Republic reported she agreed to an interview between the reporter and union officials on Dec. 12 but subsequently failed to respond to contact attempts.
Unite Here had not responded to the Republic’s request for comment as of the article’s Dec. 14. publication. A check of the Republic website on the morning of Dec. 16 showed no updates.
The article does, however, say, “A union attorney instead contacted Axon in an effort to ‘recall’ its emailed agreement, arguing it contained attorney-client privileged information, according to Leibowitz.”
The alleged claim of privilege is confusing, since Unite Here voluntarily sent the request to Axon, apparently without Axon having requested it. The union also did not, as far as can be determined, secure a non-disclosure agreement.
It is understandable why Unite Here would want to keep the communication private. For one thing, it unequivocally refutes the claim the union has not contacted Axon. For another, the individual components of the proposal are decidedly far ranging.
The proposal says Unite Here wants to organize the employees of the hotel, restaurant and other relevant operations on the site and that it will not picket, strike or boycott the project if it is the exclusive collective bargaining agent.
It also demands to be provided with the identity and contact information of any firm that will operate a relevant business inside the project (which would include the hotel and restaurants). Axon would be required to notify the union any time it planned to solicit bids or proposals from business operators and also incorporate all the terms of the interactive oversight into its agreement with those partners. The obligations would be written into any lease, purchase, operating agreement or franchise agreement as a mandatory item.
The proposal would require the operating businesses to work with Unite Here and its affiliated “Hospitality Training Academy” to screen the initial complement of applicants and refer those it deems qualified back to the operators. According to this section, “After initially screening such applicants, the HTA shall present them to the Operator for initial consideration. Neither the Union nor the HTA will be obligated to present or train for applicants once they have presented a number of qualified applicants willing to accept employment with the Operator equal in number to the positions available at the full public opening of the Hotel.”
After receiving a notice of intent to organize from the union, operators would be required to submit complete contact information – including names, job classifications, phone numbers and home addresses, along with other details—for employees whose jobs would be covered by bargaining agreements. The business operator could not make any statements expressing opposition to the union or to the plan to unionize operations.
The operators would also be prohibited from contesting the union’s stated results for employee votes on whether or not to accept unionization and would be required to support the union if any other party filed a dispute with the National Labor Relations Board.
Regarding disputes, including an inability for operators and the union to come to an agreement recognizing Unite Here as the exclusive collecting bargaining agent, the operator and the union would go to binding arbitration with Unite Here’s chosen arbitrator. Any action concerning arbitration would fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, not the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.
Not quoting anyone from Axon directly, the Republic article says the company considers Unite Here’s demands to be “a shakedown.”
It then goes on to quote Leibowitz, who said, “I’m not picking on labor unions or anything like that. They serve a valuable function, no question about that. But … this does feel a little bit like there’s quid pro quo here — ‘you want us to leave you alone? You should sign this agreement.’”
