Sodexo Settles RICO Action Against SEIU
Time 2 Minute Read

Hunton & Williams client Sodexo Inc. announced last week that it has settled its civil RICO lawsuit against the Service Employees International Union, marking the end of the SEIU's contentious two year corporate campaign against the company.  Sodexo had alleged that the union conduct constituted extortion under RICO. Earlier this summer, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, in which the case was pending, denied the SEIU's motion to dismiss the case, finding that Sodexo had stated viable RICO claims.

Sodexo's racketeering suit is the latest in a series of recent RICO actions brought by major employers facing union corporate campaign attacks.  In 2008, Hunton & Williams brought a similar suit on behalf of Smithfield Foods, Inc., which alleged that the United Food and Commercial Workers Union had tried to extort Smithfield into recognizing the union as bargaining agent at Smithfield's Tar Heel, North Carolina plant.  That case survived both a motion to dismiss and summary judgment and settled on the morning of trial.  Other similar RICO cases, however, have not met with the same level of success.  In 2009, federal district courts in New York and Florida dismissed civil RICO claims brought against unions by Cintas Corp. and Wackenhut, respectively.

Read more from the Wall Street Journal and BNA

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 6 Minute Read

Scabby the Rat is a familiar sight in disputes between unions and employers. Scabby, a giant inflatable rat with red eyes, fangs, and claws, is often placed outside the places of business of employers with whom a union has a labor dispute (the “primary” employer).  Recently, the NLRB again addressed the issue of whether such union protests can be directed against a “secondary” neutral employer who does business with the primary employer but who is not party to the underlying labor dispute.

Time 3 Minute Read

On June 1, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit overturned a NLRB determination that a manager’s incorrect blaming of a union for discrepancies in an employee’s paid-leave time constituted an unfair labor practice. The pivotal issue was whether the manager’s statements had a reasonable tendency to interfere with employees’ labor rights. As discussed below, the D.C. Circuit rejected the NLRB’s determination that the manager’s statements had a reasonable tendency to interfere with employees’ labor rights, reasoning that the manager’s misstatements were lawful expressions of the employer’s opinions.

Time 1 Minute Read

During the 2020 legislative session, Virginia passed several important employment bills. Perhaps none is more consequential than H.B. 582. Effective as of May 21, 2021, it permits the governing bodies of Virginia cities, towns, counties, and school boards to adopt a local resolution or ordinance authorizing collective bargaining and recognizing labor unions. The bill provides no guidance on how to create and implement a union recognition and bargaining process, leaving such decisions to covered localities. Consequently, the burden to fill in the gaps will fall to local ...

Time 1 Minute Read

1570042501

The NLRB Continues Its Trend of Employer-Friendly Decisions

This summer, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) issued several decisions that could have important effects for retailers. This article summarizes two of those decisions and explains how they could impact employers.

Continue Reading

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page