Federal Judge Orders Cannabis Dispensary Operator to Bargain with Union

LOS ANGELES- In a landmark decision, U.S. District Judge Myong Joun has mandated that the cannabis dispensary operator I.N.S.A. must negotiate with the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union, despite its employees voting against unionization. This ruling, issued on Tuesday in Boston, marks the first court application of a pivotal 2023 National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decision, setting a new precedent for union organization.

Judge Joun dismissed I.N.S.A.’s argument that the significant NLRB ruling involving Cemex, a building materials company, would likely be overturned by federal appeals courts. He refused to speculate on future court decisions, emphasizing that he would not engage in “mere fortune-telling.”

The court granted the NLRB’s request for a temporary injunction, compelling I.N.S.A. to negotiate with UFCW and rehire two union supporters who were terminated at a Salem, Massachusetts store prior to the 2022 union election. Although the staff had voted 17-11 against joining the union, the judge concurred with the NLRB’s general counsel that I.N.S.A. had violated workers’ rights and compromised the election’s integrity by dismissing the pro-union employees.

The Cemex ruling permits the NLRB to mandate employer negotiations with unions if they engage in illegal labor practices during an organizing campaign, regardless of whether a union wins an election or if an election is held. Such actions are seen as potentially deterring workers from unionizing.

I.N.S.A.’s legal representatives, who deny any wrongdoing, did not respond to requests for comment. However, NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo praised the decision, stating that it rightly recognized the company’s coercive impact on workers’ rights to a fair election. Abruzzo added that the district court’s decision ensures employees can exercise their rights under the National Labor Relations Act.

UFCW attorney Alex Robertson also expressed satisfaction with the ruling, asserting that questions about the Board’s interpretation of the Act should be resolved through the standard administrative litigation process.

The legal battle began last year when an NLRB regional director sought a court injunction against I.N.S.A., pending a decision on the underlying board case accusing the company of unlawful labor practices. In September, an administrative judge, in the first application of the Cemex decision, ordered I.N.S.A. to negotiate with the union. The five-member NLRB, whose decisions can be appealed to federal courts, is currently reviewing this ruling.

The Cemex decision has been hailed as a significant victory for organized labor, offering a new strategy for unionizing beyond the traditional election process. Cemex has appealed the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

The case is Sacks v. I.N.S.A. Inc, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, No. 23-12368.

Legal Representation:

• For the NLRB: Daniel Fein and Miriam Hasbun
• For I.N.S.A.: Allison Anderson and Jonathan Keselenko of Foley Hoag
• For the union: Alfred Gordon O’Connell and Alex Robertson of Pyle Rome Ehrenberg