IBJNews

Labor board seeks rehiring of fired pro-union store worker

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The National Labor Relations Board has asked a federal judge to order Fishers-based Marsh Supermarkets to rehire a pro-union worker whom the company fired.

The United Food and Commercial Workers union is trying to organize the grocery chain's 5,000 workers in about 100 stores in Indiana and Ohio, but has been unsuccessful so far.

Tony Massey was fired Sept. 7 from his job in Marsh's Beech Grove store, according to a complaint filed Sept. 15. It says Massey was required to take a Breathalyzer test while on the job before being fired.

Marsh issued a statement Wednesday saying the company "vehemently denies the charges and looks forward" to a hearing.

The labor board asked a federal judge in Indianapolis to order Marsh to offer to rehire Massey, make up his lost pay and clean his employment record.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Union or not Marsh does not CARE
    Unions still have a need in this country so we as Americans can get fair wages and health care.
    As a union member for the last 16 yrs, I do not argue that the higher
    ups in the union have done a lot to harm what good
    It initially set out to do.
    Nonetheless Companies do not have the right to
    Violate our rights, no more than any other human being,
    We have the right to organize, regardless of what
    The unions have done to harm us.
    Marsh is and continues to not care about workers, in their stores and their distribution centers.
  • Unions Are Serving !
    Union workers like being in a Union and do serve a need in the workforce arena.
  • So what
    I dont care if he was given a breathalyzer at work. So what? Don't come to work drunk and you have nothing to worry about. Besides, unions are killing America. They have long since outlived their useful basis of making sure that workers were not mistreated. They are now interested solely in gouging employers and destroying American business. Go ask the major auto makers.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    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
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

    2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

    3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

    4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

    5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

    ADVERTISEMENT