News
Community Safety Department Director To Resign Amid Tension With Cambridge Police Department
News
From Lab to Startup: Harvard’s Office of Technology Development Paves the Way for Research Commercialization
News
People’s Forum on Graduation Readiness Held After Vote to Eliminate MCAS
News
FAS Closes Barker Center Cafe, Citing Financial Strain
News
8 Takeaways From Harvard’s Task Force Reports
The Harvard Square Coop has decided not to appeal charges of interfering with a 1981 unionization drive, and new union elections will probably take place this fall at the popular department stone.
Coop management officials last week informed federal mediators investigating the unsuccessful March 1981 election that the store will comply with a recent ruling by a Boston administrative law judge in favor of United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1445.
The union had charged the Coop with offering employees bonuses during the unionization drive to influence them to reject outside representation. Union officials also said the store management harassed and interrogated some employees.
Explaining the somewhat surprising decision not to demand another review of the case by the National Labor Relations Board in Washington. Louis Loss, a member of the Coop's Board of Directors, said yesterday. "We don't concede on any of [the union's charges], but we do recognize that we would have to spend a lot of time and money carrying out an appeal, and it doesn't seem worth-while."
Loss, who is also a professor at the Law School, predicted an early fall election and vowed that the Coop would abide by established fair labor practices.
"If the employees want a labor union, they'll vote for it." he added.
But William McDonough, a Food and Commercial Workers Union organizes, said he expects" a lot of the same sort of things" that prompted the initial dispute.
"We will be watching very Closely." McDonough said. The 1981 drove failed by a vote of 273-156.
Guy Molyneus '83, a leader among progressive student members of the Coop's Board of Directors, endorsed the decision not to appeal but complained that the store management did not consult the board.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.