The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found AutoZone guilty of unlawful conduct during a union drive at a distribution center in the early nineties.
Posted by Behind the Bastards, Checked
- Sources
- 3 support
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 80%
Behind the BastardsOct 3, 2026
Sources on the same 1992–93 Greenville, South Carolina distribution center campaign show the NLRB found AutoZone interfered unlawfully, ordered a rerun election, and the Sixth Circuit enforced the Board's order in 1996.
What was said
… Make your coffee at home or buy it from a union shop, just not Starbucks. But back to the zone: this isn't the first time AutoZone execs have locked in to crush a union drive, either. Back in the early nineties, the Teamsters tried to organize one of their distribution centers, but were unsuccessful. Even though the union drive failed, the NLRB still dinged the company for its unlawful conduct during their union busting spree. I guess old habits die hard, because this time around, according to Nathan De Kong, a parts equipment manager, AutoZone was trying to do everything possible to destroy us, to destroy our union. …
Behind the Bastards · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. The Sixth Circuit's 1996 decision denied AutoZone's petition and granted the NLRB's cross-application to enforce its September 30, 1994 order concerning the Greenville, SC distribution center union campaign.[1][2]
Supports. The NLRB decision (315 NLRB No. 21, Sept. 30, 1994) ordered a rerun election after the employer committed numerous acts constituting interference with employees' rights during the Teamsters organizing drive.[3]
Context. The Board's findings relate to a union campaign that began in October or November 1992, with the Union seeking representation at the Greenville facility, consistent with the early-nineties timeframe in the claim.[1][2]
Sources
3 sources: 3 not rated
- 1Autozone, Inc. v. N.L.R.B.case-law.vlex.com · not rated · cited for: supports, context
- 2Autozone, Inc., Petitioner Cross-respondent, v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent Cross-petitioner, 83 F.3d 422 (6th Cir. 1996)law.justia.com · not rated · cited for: supports, context
- 3LABOR-RELATIONS 1993-94 CCH-NLRB...vitallaw.com · not rated · cited for: supports
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- AutoZone fired Nathan De Kong following the unionization vote at the White Plains store.True
- AutoZone management fired a supervisor at the White Plains store for failing to stop the union.Mixed
- AutoZone spent over 200,000 dollars to oppose the unionization effort at the White Plains store.True
- The National Labor Relations Board ordered Alaska Tanker Company and Overseas Shipholding Group to recognize the union and start bargaining.True
- In 2000, Walmart eliminated its entire meat department in Texas and five other states after meat cutters at a Texas location voted to unionize.True