Judge orders concrete company to bargain with union

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A federal judge has ordered Irving Ready-Mix Inc. to recognize and bargain with the Teamsters union, and to restore wages and overtime pay to workers that had been cut by nearly $3 an hour.

The temporary injunction, granted Jan. 28 in the Northern District of Indiana, will remain in effect until the full National Labor Relations Board administrative process in the case is complete. The NLRB requested the injunction.

The latest contract between Fort Wayne-based Irving Ready-Mix and the Chauffeurs, Teamsters & Helpers Local Union No. 414, which covers 23 drivers, expired at the end of May.

The union called for a strike after contract negotiations broke down on June 1. At that point, Irving announced it no longer recognized the union as the collective bargaining representative of the employees, according to an NLRB press release.

During the strike, five drivers quit the union, and in July the union offered an unconditional return to work. The company took back all the drivers but reduced their pay from $20.82 an hour to $18 an hour and changed overtime calculations, the release said. It also continued to refuse to recognize the union.

The union filed charges with the NLRB Regional Office in Indianapolis, which issued a complaint in late August. An administrative law judge in December issued an order concluding that Irving violated the law by withdrawing recognition of the union and changing terms of employment.

Irving has appealed the decision to the NLRB in Washington, D.C.

NLRB is a federal agency charged with safeguarding employees’ rights to organize, and with preventing and remedying unfair labor practices committed by private-sector employers and unions.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. PJ - Mall operators like Simon, and most developers/ land owners, establish individual legal entities for each property to avoid having a problem location sink the ship, or simply structure the note to exclude anything but the property acting as collateral. Usually both. The big banks that lend are big boys that know the risks and aren't mad at Simon for forking over the deed and walking away.

  2. Do any of the East side residence think that Macy, JC Penny's and the other national tenants would have letft the mall if they were making money?? I have read several post about how Simon neglected the property but it sounds like the Eastsiders stopped shopping at the mall even when it was full with all of the national retailers that you want to come back to the mall. I used to work at the Dick's at Washington Square and I know for a fact it's the worst performing Dick's in the Indianapolis market. You better start shopping there before it closes also.

  3. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  4. If you only knew....

  5. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.