El Paso Texas - 7/ 23/2024 - After a year long delay caused by SPiT-FA and their attorneys the National Labor Relations Board NLRB has finally issued a decision and direction of election in Cases 28-RD-320410 and 28-RD-320960 ordering an election. See below.
SUMMARY
On June 21, 2023, (Petitioner) filed a petition in Case 28-RD-320410 (first petition), seeking to decertify International Union, (SPiT-FA) & (SPiT-FA) Local 725) as the collective bargaining representative of all full-time and regular part-time officers employed by Paragon Professional Services, LLC and Asset Protection and Security Services, LP, (collectively, the Employers) at the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) El Paso Processing Center in El Paso, Texas (Employers’ facility). The parties stipulated that the Petitioner did not serve NLRB Form 505 “Statement of Position” and NLRB Form 4812 “Description of Representation Case Procedures in Certification and Decertification Cases” (collectively, NLRB Forms 505 and 4812) on the parties when Petitioner filed the first petition.
On June 28, the Petitioner requested withdrawal of the first petition to Region 28 (the Region). The Region did not approve the Petitioner’s request to withdraw the first petition.
On June 29, the Petitioner filed a petition in Case 28-RD-320960 (second petition), seeking to decertify SPiT-FA Local 725 as the collective-bargaining representative of all full-time and part-time armed and unarmed detention security officers employed by the Employers, as Joint Employers. The parties stipulated at hearing that the Employers are joint employers. The parties further stipulated that the Petitioner did not serve NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 on the parties when Petitioner filed the second petition.
On June 30, United Federation LEOS-PBA Law Enforcement Officers Security & Police Benevolent Association (the Intervenor) moved to intervene in the election in the second petition after the detention security officers working for Paragon Professional Services, LLC and Asset Protection and Security Services, LP, reached out to our Union United Federation LEOS-PBA to represent them knowing that they could not be without Union representation.
On July 18, the Region issued an Order Granting the Intervenor’s Motion to Intervene.
On July 20, the Region consolidated the first petition and the second petition for hearing.
On July 21, a hearing was conducted before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board (Board), and all parties, including the Intervenor, were given the opportunity to present evidence and to state their respective positions on the record. The Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to me under Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (the Act). SPiT-FA Local 725, Petitioner, and the Intervenor filed post-hearing briefs.
As usual, SPiT-FA once again uses it's attorneys to delay a Decertification NLRB election filed by its own members, raising any issue that will delay or stop a decertification election, as in this case which took over a year to decide.
The Parties’ Positions
The sole issue at hearing was whether the Region should dismiss the first petition and second petition because the Petitioner admittedly did not serve NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 on any of the parties. SPiT-FA Local 725 contends that the Petitioner failed to properly serve the petition documents as required by Section 102.60(a), and the Region lacks discretion to excuse the Petitioner’s non-compliance with Section 102.60(a), citing URS Federal Services, Inc., 365 NLRB No. 1 (2018).
The Petitioner argues that his failure to serve NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 on the parties when he filed the first petition and second petition was unintentional, since he was an unrepresented, individual Petitioner without any prior experience filing petitions or serving Board documents.
The Petitioner asserts that SPiT-FA Local 725 failed to show any harm from his failures to serve NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 with the first petition and second petition.
Similarly, the Intervenor United Federation LEOS-PBA through their attorney Jon Axelrod argues that the Region should not dismiss the first petition or the second petition because the Union suffered no prejudice from Petitioner’s failure to serve NLRB Forms 505 and 4812, as it is undisputed that: all parties received a docketing letter from the Region, including NLRB Forms 505 and 4812; all parties except for Petitioner are represented by experienced counsel; and SPiT-FA Local 725 timely filed a Statement of Position for the second petition.
Relevant Legal Precedent and Analysis
SPiT-FA Local 725 argues that because the Petitioner failed to serve any of the parties with NLRB Forms 505 and 4812, the Region erred in docketing both petitions, and therefore, the petitions should be dismissed, citing URS Federal Services, Inc., 365 NLRB No. 1.
The NLRB finds URS Federal Services, Inc. distinguishable, as it addressed voter list requirements for petitions pursuant to Section 102.62(d) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations (Section 102.62(d)), not a petitioner’s service of NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 pursuant to Section 102.60(a) at issue here.
Section 102.62(d) has a bright-line provision requiring a strict two business day timeline for service and delineates specific consequences for failure to serve the voter list within the specified time: “[t]he employer's failure to file or serve the list within the specified time or in proper format shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper and timely objections are filed...” Section 102.62(d). Conversely, Section 102.60(a) at issue here is not such a bright-line provision, setting forth no strict deadline for service or any specified consequences for noncompliance.
"Thus, contrary to SPiT-FA's Local 725’s contentions, neither URS Federal Services, Inc. nor Section 102.62(d) have any bearing on the service of NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 pursuant to Section 102.60(a)."
NLRB Regional Director
The Petitioner served the parties with the petition, but, unintentionally, due to Petitioner’s inexperience, inadvertently failed to serve the parties with NLRB Forms 505 and 4812. While not the same procedural context as here, when determining whether to grant motions for default judgment, the Board has shown “some leniency toward respondents who proceed without benefit of counsel.” See, e.g. Valladares Landscaping Artists, LLC, 373 NLRB No. 29 (2024), slip op. at 2, citing Clearwater Sprinkler System, 340 NLRB 435, 435 (2003).
In addition, no party asserts, nor is there any record evidence showing that any party has suffered any prejudice resulting from the Petitioner’s failure to serve NLRB Forms 505 and 4812. It is undisputed that the Region served NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 on the parties with its docketing letters for the first petition on June 22 and for the second petition on June 30. Moreover, SPiT-FA Local 725 timely filed its Statement of Position for the second petition on July 13.
"Based on the foregoing and the record as a whole, I decline to dismiss the first petition and the second petition due to the Petitioner’s negligent failures to serve the parties with NLRB Forms 505 and 4812 when Petitioner filed these petitions." NLRB Regional Director
See Unpublished Board Order, Avis Budget Group, Inc., Case 12-RC-153554 (Jan. 11, 2016) (finding a petitioner’s negligent failure to effectuate service of a petition as required by Section 102.60(a) did not require dismissal of the petition, where the petition was served on the relevant parties by the Regional Office, no prejudice was alleged, and the evidence did not establish intentional falsification of the certificate of service of the petition).
PPS & ASSET Protection Detention Officers deserve a collective bargaining agreement and a Union that will negotiate yearly wage rates of $3.00 or more an hour not the pitiful wage increases SPiT-FA continues to negotiate on behalf of these PPS & ASSET Protection Detention Officers as noted in their CBA below. The time has come to support and to stand together and support our Union, United Federation LEOS-PBA that truly will represent your interests NOT managements interests and/or SPiT-FA's self interests. Enough said!
While SPiT-FA President David L. Hickey shown above was successful in delaying this NLRB decertification petition for over a year ago the reality is that these Paragon Professional Services, LLC and Asset Protection and Security Services, LP, detention security officers will finally have an opportunity to rid themselves of SPiT-FA by voting in favor of our Union United Federation LEOS-PBA Law Enforcement Officers Security & Police and Benevolent Association.
Based on the above there’s a significant labor dispute unfolding. The key points in your statement are:
1.David L. Hickey’s Role: David L. Hickey, as the SPiT-FA President, managed to delay the decertification petition for a year. This likely means he has been effective in staving off the push for a different union representation.
2. Union Decertification Petition: This petition seems to be about removing the current union (SPiT-FA) from representing the detention security officers.
3. Paragon Professional Services and Asset Protection and Security Services: These are the employers where the detention security officers work. The current union representation is under SPiT-FA, but there is a move to change this.
4. Union United Federation LEOS-PBA: This is the alternative union being proposed to represent the detention security officers. The LEOS-PBA stands for Law Enforcement Officers Security & Police and Benevolent Association and we are here to represent your interests.
5. Its time to Drain the Swamp and Make America Great Again by getting rid of SPiT-FA & its SPiT-FA representative Maria Gammon by voting in favor of the United Federation LEOS-PBA Law Enforcement Officers Security & Police Benevolent Association!
The upcoming vote represents a critical opportunity for the detention security officers to change their union representation if they choose to do so. It’s a pivotal moment for both the current union and the proposed one.
A. Election Details
As requested by the Employers, and the Intervenor, based on the lack of evidence showing an appropriate location to conduct a manual election as Petitioner requests, I have determined that a mail ballot election will be held. The ballots will be mailed to employees employed in the appropriate collective-bargaining unit. At 2:00 p.m. (Pacific Time Zone) on August 16, 2024, ballots will be mailed to voters from the National Labor Relations Board, Region 28. Voters must sign the outside of the envelope in which the ballot is returned. Any ballot received in an envelope that is not signed will be automatically void.
Those employees who believe that they are eligible to vote and did not receive a ballot in the mail by August 23, 2024 should communicate immediately with the National Labor Relations Board by either calling the Region 28 Office at (602) 640-2160 or our national toll-free line at 1-844-762-NLRB (1-844-762-6572).
Voters must return their mail ballots so that they will be received in the National Labor Relations Board, Region 28 Office by close of business (4:45 p.m.) on September 6, 2024. All ballots will be commingled and counted by an agent of Region 28 of the National Labor Relations Board. The mail ballots will be counted by videoconference at a date and time to be determined by the Regional Director in consultation with the parties. Each party may have one representative attend the count by videoconference. A meeting invitation for the videoconference will be sent to counsel for the parties prior to the count. No party may make a video or audio recording or save any image of the count. In order to be valid and counted, the returned ballots must be received in the Regional Office prior to the counting of the ballots.
The parties stipulated, and I so find, the following employees of the Employers constitute a unit (the Unit) appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:
INCLUDED: All full-time and regular part-time armed and unarmed detention security officers performing guard duties as defined in Section 9(b)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act, who are employed by the Employers at the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) El Paso Processing Center in El Paso, Texas.
EXCLUDED: All other employees, office clerical employees, professional employees, and supervisors as defined by the Act.
Based on the recent embarrassing loss in San Diego whereby our Union United Federation LEOS-PBA beat SPiT-FA once again by a score of 54 to 1 and our big victory in Hawaii, Guam, Saipan and American Samoa whereby these Paragon PSO's voted 64 to 11 in favor of the United Federation LEOS-PBA against SPiT-FA, as well as the recent loss of 294 court security officers in Washington DC whereby SPiT-FA received only ONE (1) vote out of 294 votes there is a great indication that SPiT-FA will lose yet again in another embarrassing loss to our Union in El Paso.
Given this context, it's reasonable to anticipate that a similar outcome might be expected for the full-time and regular part-time officers employed by Paragon Professional Services, LLC and Asset Protection and Security Services, LP at the ICE El Paso Processing Center. If the trend continues, the United Federation LEOS-PBA is likely to receive substantial support in this setting as well.
If you're involved in this process or have a stake in the outcome, it’s always a good idea to stay informed about the specific dynamics of this campaign at the El Paso Processing Center and to ensure that the interests and concerns of all employees are addressed effectively.
In this particular election of the Court Security Officers CSO's / SSO's in Washington DC, working for Walden Security, SPiT-FA only received just one (1) vote out of 294 votes in another embarrassing loss to our Union. SPiT-FA / Hickey's union was so embarrassed by this loss and receiving only one vote, that they walked out of the vote count refusing to stay and sign the tally of ballots as noted above.
SPiT-FA is also facing another election come August 28th when the Patronus Systems, Inc PSO's in Idaho will have an opportunity to rid themselves from SPiT-FA to vote in favor of joining our Union as well as the SecTek Inc officers in New Hampshire now presently under contract with SPiT-FA.
United Federation LEOS-PBA now represents more Paragon Systems Inc Protective Service Officers PSO's than any other security union. Representing Paragon PSO's in Los Angeles California, Riverside, San Bernardino counties, San Diego & Imperial counties, California, Kentucky, Upstate New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, & Washington DC Capitol Region just to mention a few.
If you wish to join or form a security union at your workplace them please join the United Federation LEOS-PBA Law Enforcement Officers Security & Police Benefit Association the true authority of Law Enforcement, Protective Service Officers, Correctional Officers, Special Police Officers, Security Police Officers, Nuclear Security Officers, K9 Handlers, Event Security, Transportation Security Officers TSO's, Security Officers, Security Guards and Security Professionals nationwide. Contact us today @ 1-800-516-0094 or visit our website @ www.LEOSPBA.org
Organizing: 1-800-516-0094
United Federation LEOS-PBA (202) 595-3510
Comments