The NLRB’s hearing into Foxwoods’ objections to the union election continues this week. The latest issue to resurface is one that has surfaced before — tribal sovereignty. As I’ve said previously, I believe this is the type of "big picture" issue that may ultimately take this case up to the U.S. Supreme Court. .jpg)
Because the case
The hearing by the NLRB into objections raised by Foxwoods resumed Wednesday with new details about alleged harassment experienced by dealers in the course of the election last fall. (For background on the objections and the elections, click here.)
As usual, The Day is quick with the details this morning. According to the report
NLRB Hearings are best left to those who have lots of patience and time, two things I’m missing this week. Thus, unless there are major developments that occur, I’ll only briefly recap where things stand, on occasion, on the ongoing Foxwoods/UAW saga.
While the mainstream press has been reporting on the upcoming hearing tomorrow on some of Foxwoods’ o
bjections to the election, Foxwoods has also been challenging the Regional Director’s decision on December 21, 2007 rejecting the other objections raised by Foxwoods. Thus, readers should be aware that reporting on the hearing tomorrow is only one
Readers of the blog will no doubt know that the battle for unionization at Foxwoods Resort Casino is one of the most significant labor issues in Connecticut in many years. A hearing on the tribe’s objections to the election of UAW is scheduled to begin on Tuesday, Januay 15th, which I’ve discussed before.
Last week, while many (including myself) were vacationing, the NLRB set a date for a hearing on the objections raised by Foxwoods. I last updated the status in this post. You can find all the posts about the election here.
As to the hearing, The Day reports,
A recent decision by the NLRB found