“We love our jobs and that is why we all want to have something in place like this.”
By Rebecca Rivas, Missouri Independent
Ahmad Haynes, a few employees and BeLeaf Medical at the Sinse Cannabis facility in St. Louis waited with bated breath for 5 p.m.
His co-workers and he had gathered in front of the Barr branch of St. Louis Public Library, where they had earlier cast their votes for unionization that afternoon. After a long-fought legal fight that began in September, their employer contested their eligibility to become unionized.
They all shuffled in a conference room at the library a few minutes before 5 pm to hear the results.
Haynes, an post-harvest technician with Sinse told The Independent that “we all love our job, which is why it’s important to have something like this.”
Marilyn Gleason’s, BeLeaf’s director of Human Resources, instructed him to wait as the representative for the National Labor Relations Board gathered up the votes.
BeLeaf, the attorney for the company, said that she had spoken to the company about the eligibility of 11 employees to vote, out of the 16 total who voted.
Haynes’ jaw dropped and employees stared around in disbelief.
Todd Rick, an ex-post-harvest specialist at Sinse Cannabis that was terminated earlier this month, said: “I could not believe it.” “But I was not surprised at all.”
The company claimed that he, along with other employees, had filed their petition in September to unionize. However the company said before the board of directors that the employees were not manufacturer workers but agricultural workers.
The 1935 National Labor Relations Act does not protect agricultural workers. This act guarantees employees the right to “seek better working conditions and designate representation without fear of reprisal.”
Board Regional Director Andrea Wilkes released a 13-page Decision on January 25 detailing why employees were not agricultural workers, and therefore could vote in the unionization elections.
Wilkes was essentially asked to reconsider her decision by the company on Tuesday.
Gleason replied that her lawyer had advised her to challenge the votes, after Wilkes already declared them valid.
Beleaf Medical has not responded to The Independent’s numerous requests for comment.
According to a Wednesday letter Wilkes sent to the lawyers representing the union and the company, the 11 ballots that were challenged had been sealed in an envelope. The regional director would decide whether to open the envelope after further investigation.
Sean Shannon, lead organizer of United Food and Commercial Workers International Union local 655, said that Wilkes’ ruling in the case is likely to impact many cannabis workers across the state. They’ve been told by their employers they aren’t eligible for unionization because they’re agricultural workers.
Shannon stated that “this is going show not only they could try, but they are going to be successful,” because the BeLeaf Union is going succeed.
The company can still appeal and ask the five-member national board, appointed by the President, to review the results of the elections and the decision made by the regional director on January 25, 2019. This ruling would be a precedent in labor law across the country.
Not agricultural workers
Rick said that earlier this month, at the end of his shift, Gleason called Rick into an office to accuse him of turning off a humidifier several times. He said he was suspended and paid.
Gleason called him when he reached his car and informed him that he had been fired. Rick felt he was targeted because he never received any warnings about the actions or possible discipline. He soon filed a Complaint to the NLRB.
He said, “They knew I was a major player in the formation of the union.”
Rick testified to the board about his work in the fall.
Will Braddum told The Independent that during the October 27 hearing company representatives gave the board the job descriptions of their employees, including “a lot of the cultivation side job description”, Will Braddum is a post harvest technician for Sinse Cannabis. He said it was surprising that the employees who had to testify and refuted this description were surprised.
He said, “I have never watered or touched soil.” “I have never touched a plant that is alive at work.”
Wilkes concluded that the employees in the post-harvest department are not “engaged in primary agriculture activities”. They are separate from the departments of cultivation and harvest, and their duties do not overlap.
BeLeaf, according to Wilkes’ ruling, operates three Swade dispensaries and three cannabis cultivation centers. The largest of the BeLeaf cultivation facilities is located on Cherokee Street, St. Louis. Here 29 employees take care of the plants while five others harvest and dry the marijuana plants.
Wilkes explained that 13 employees work in a separate department to de-stem the dried plants. Some weigh the product, and enter that information into the state’s tracking software Metrc.
After the marijuana has been de-stemmed and separated, it is packaged or transformed into pre-rolled joint. The facility can produce anywhere between 900 and 1,200 pre-rolls per day.
She compared post-harvest workers at Sinse to those in a tobacco manufacturing plant.
She wrote that the federal labor law has ruled that “removing the veins and fermenting tobacco leaves” does not fall under the definition of farming.
Wilkes writes that federal courts look at whether a product has been altered from its “raw and natural state” and is more similar to manufacturing than agriculture.
Wilkes wrote: “In summary, the employer’s process of post-harvest production is not just a preparation for the market. It uses industrialized processes that transform marijuana from its original state into products ready for sale.” “I find, therefore, that the employees who work at the post-harvest are employees under the Act. They are not exempted from the Act as agricultural workers.”
What is the meaning of ?
Jeff Toppel is a labor lawyer with the Bianchi Brandt law firm in Arizona. He has kept an eye on the BeLeaf lawsuit, as have other labor lawyers and unions across the country.
He said that it was not clear up until now if post-harvest workers were to be excluded from the agricultural workforce, and this has led unions towards focusing more on dispensary employees.
Toppel explained that this was in large part due to the uncertainty. This decision will open up the door for unions to shift their focus to [post-harvest] employees.
The decision of the regional director on 25 January did not set a precedent for national law.
He said: “But I believe it’s definitely an indication of the way the board will decide.” It is a major decision that could have wide-ranging effects.
Wilkes, the company’s director, has agreed to do so.
Wilkes wrote to the lawyers representing the union and the company on Wednesday night, stating that they had until February 13 to submit a statement describing why the individuals in question are or are not eligible to participate in the elections, as well as evidence supporting their position.
Wilkes wrote: “If I find that the ballots challenged raise material and substantial factual questions, I will schedule an hearing as soon as possible.”
Toppel said that Wilkes’ decision to allow this evidence be reviewed two times is “unusual.”
He said that no matter what Wilkes decided, the company would likely appeal to the National Board.
Toppel stated that “a decision from the board …” will provide much-needed clarity on an important issue which will have a major impact on the future organization in the cannabis sector.”
This article was originally published by Missouri Independent.
Legal opinion says that moving marijuana to Schedule III would not violate international treaties
The original post Missouri Marijuana Company Argues that Workers Aren’t Allowed to Unionize Due to Federal Law first appeared on Marijuana moment.
