**Click here for the latest news on Native gaming and Proposition 5**
(California's Modern Indian War)
www.sfgate.com Return to regular viewLabor wants Prop. 5 to be defeated
By Zachary Coile
OF THE EXAMINER STAFF
Tuesday, October 13, 1998
URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/hotnews/stories/13/labor.dtl
Tribal leaders see unions as a threat to Indian sovereignty, if gaming ballot measure passes
California labor unions are mounting a high-profile effort to defeat a Nov. 3 statewide ballot measure that would expand Indian gambling operations.
The unions don't oppose an increase in gambling in California - as long as their membership gets a share of the new jobs created.
The issue of who will gain from the passage of Proposition 5, the Indian gaming measure, is driving the union's opposition campaign.
"If it became law, it could allow major employers to get away with ignoring basic, hard-earned workers' rights," said Walter Johnson, secretary-treasurer of the San Francisco Labor Council.
Tribal leaders argue the initiative provides plenty of safeguards for workers. They suspect that the unions' real desire is to increase their membership and power, at the expense of tribal sovereignty.
The initiative has also stirred up anger between the California Labor Federation, which represents 2 million members, and a handful of unions that back the measure. Federation officials fear the tribes are cutting special deals with certain unions in exchange for their support.
At stake are the nearly 15,000 jobs at the approximately 40 tribal casinos in the state; 95 percent of the workers are non-Indians and not one is currently represented by a union. Some of the jobs have not traditionally been represented by unions - such as card dealers and security guards - but labor is eyeing other casino workers, including bartenders, cooks and wait staff, janitors and other service employees.
Organized labor has supported previous campaigns in California to build more card rooms, racetracks and other gambling establishments where union workers can get jobs.
Voters will decide Nov. 3 on Prop. 5, which would allow the tribes to keep their nearly 14,000 slot machines. State and federal officials have said the slot machines are illegal.
Labor unions already are a force in the campaign, with a vigorous effort to elect Lt. Gov. Gray Davis, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee, and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. But defeating Prop. 5 is the next item on their wish list.
The big money backers of the No on 5 campaign are the Nevada casino and hotel operators, who fear a jump in Indian gambling could cut into their business. In the recent reporting period ending Sept. 30, more than 98 percent of contributions were from Nevada interests.
The unions provide something else: manpower. As part of a $2¸million get-out-the-vote effort, members of the labor federation plan to walk precincts, send mailings and use phone banks to sway union members and their friends and family members. The federation also may buy TV ads in areas with large concentrations of union members.
Opponents say the measure:
*Does not give workers the right to collective bargaining.
*Would not force employers to pay the state's minimum wage, or provide workers' compensation and disability insurance for employees.
*Would not provide for state oversight of health and safety conditions for workers.
The tribes accuse the unions of distorting the facts.
Dan Tucker, chairman of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, said the tribes already follow federal minimum wage requirements. Most tribes pay better than minimum wage, he said. At most casinos, the base pay is more than $6 per hour; the state minimum wage is $5.75.
The measure requires tribes to provide workers' compensation and disability insurance programs "comparable to those mandated for comparable workplaces under state law." The labor federation maintains the requirement can't be enforced by the state. But Prop. 5 supporters say any tribes caught not complying could see their operations shut down by the federal Indian Gaming Commission.
The tribes also note that all federal laws protecting worker health and safety would still apply to Indian casinos.
Many tribal leaders also have said they see unions as outside entities that could threaten Indian sovereignty.
Unions were involved in negotiations for a model compact Gov. Wilson signed with the Pala Band of Mission Indians to offer casino gambling consistent with state law. Tribal officials say the compact includes a "non-interference" clause which would bar tribal leaders from discussing the merits of union representation with tribal members.
"We have never been against unions, but we would like to sit down and talk with them on a face-to-face basis without having it (be) a law," said Tucker, a member of the Sycuan tribe in San Diego County. "The Pala compact forces us to do so with a gun to our heads."
The Pala Band and 10 other tribes signed agreements allowing unions to organize on reservations, and guaranteeing that tribes offer workers compensation, disability insurance and meet Cal-OSHA health and safety standards. But the agreements do have limits.
Howard Dickstein, the attorney for the Pala tribe, who also negotiated the compact for the Table Mountain Rancheria near Fresno, said the agreements were more favorable to casino managers than to the unions.
"Before the unions were even allowed to talk to the tribe, they had to renounce the right to strike or to take any economic action," Dickstein said.
"It's a very good deal from the employer's point of view. They're not subject to (National Labor Relations Board) supervision, everything goes to binding arbitration, there's no collective bargaining for at least two years. And only perhaps 15 to 20 percent of the workers will be subject to it: valet parkers, janitors and restaurant employees. That's all."
Jack Gribbon, vice president of the labor federation and state political director for the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union, said the state's largest gambling tribes have made clear in meetings over the last year that they oppose unionization.
"We said to them, we will help you with your expansion efforts, with legalizing your operations. We will help you in return for enforceable rights for workers," Gribbon said. "They thought that given all of the money and all of the power they've accumulated through making political contributions . . . that they didn't need to deal with organized labor. So they told us basically to go pound sand."
In recent weeks, two of the biggest gambling tribes - the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians in San Diego County and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians in San Bernardino County - signed deals to allow the Communication Workers of America to hold an election for union representation of some employees.
The deals outraged labor federation officials, who saw them as part of an effort by two employers to handpick a union that will be favorable to management. Federation leaders also see the deals as a last-minute effort to blunt criticisms of the initiative.
But officials for the Yes on 5 campaign said the furor over the agreements was jealousy from the hotel and restaurant union because it wasn't part of the deal. "They wanted to make sure that they were the ones who will be organizing workers, not the Communication Workers of America," said Dan Pellissier, a campaign spokesman. "It is largely a labor civil war."