Mass dispensary, Rev Clinics fined $120,000, union files 15 objections to NETA election
Rev Clinics sold cannabis products to another establishment that did not comply with testing standards, union alleges NETA fired 53 union supporters to win election
Support local coverage, upgrade your subscription!
Earlier today, the Mass Cannabis Control Commission fined Somerville/Cambridge dispensary, Revolutionary Clinics and placed them on probation for the next four months.
Grant Smith posted:
Corporate RMD Revolutionary Clinics has been fined $120,000 and put on probation for four months after they were found to have committed a litany of enforcement violations. Any repeated violations during that period may constitute full and adequate grounds for further action. The vote to endorse that sanction was 4-0.
Firstly, Rev Clinics were found to have sold cannabis products to another establishment that did not comply with testing standards.
Secondly, Rev Clinics were found to not have kept adequate records of the testing of their wholesale products.
Thirdly, Rev Clinics failed to provide adequate documentation to ME's and MTC's demonstrating that the product had been tested for contaminants.
Fourth, Rev Clinics failed to maintain and adhere to written producers for cultivation, production or distribution of cannabis. Failed to document (ethanol was detected in the respondents CO2 cartridges).
As an aside, Rev Clinics has been under heavy community pressure for months following their lawsuit against Cambridge's equity priority period and their CEO's involvement with the "task force bill" proposed by anti-cannabis lawmaker Hannah Kane. While that behavior was obviously not related to today's enforcement action, it certainly speaks to the interest in today's enforcement action on behalf of the public. Full context on the companies history in that regard can be found here in this article.
Last week, UFCW 1445, a local affiliate of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union filed 15 objections with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against New England Treatment Access (NETA) contesting a recent Brookline union election.
UFCW 1445 objects to conduct affecting the results of the election as outlined below.
Objection No. 1
Starting in about March 2020 and continuing through the critical period, the Employer withheld regular wage increases that it has a practice of conferring after an employee has worked at the facility for six months, eighteen months, and thereafter.
Objection No. 2
The Employer engaged in the conduct described above in Objection No. 2 because employees organized with the Union, and to discourage those activities.
Objection No. 3
In about March and early April 2020, the Employer’s Chief of Staff, Operations Katie Covett solicited grievances from employees in order to discourage Union activities.
Objection No. 4
In about March or early April 2020, Anne-Marie Blood, a human-resources representative for the Employer, solicited grievances from employees in order to discourage Union activities.
Objection No. 5
In about March or early April 2020, the Employer installed glass doors to prevent employee collisions at a particular corner in the facility in order to discourage Union activities.
Objection No. 6
In about March or early April 2020, the Employer installed new carpeting or floor covering to reduce discomfort for employees standing while working in order to discourage Union activities.
Objection No. 7
In about March or early April 2020, the Employer installed more ergonomically friendly tables in the pack room in order to discourage Union activities.
Objection No. 8
In about March or early April 2020, the Employer announced that it would grant to employees a type of stock option called Restricted Stock Units.
Objection No. 9
The Employer engaged in the conduct described above in Objection No. 8 in order to discourage Union activities.
Objection No. 10
On or about April 9, 2020, the Employer discharged fifty-three employees because its employees were organizing with the Union and because they were engaging in protected concerted activities concerning safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to discourage such activities.
Objection No. 11
On or about April 9, 2020, the Employer selected employees for inclusion in the layoff described above in Objection No. 10 because they supported the Union and engaged in protected concerted activities concerning safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to discourage such activities, included but not limited to Barbara Carrapichano and JB Fulbright.
Objection No. 12
On or about April 9, 2020, the Employer offered severance pay to the employees discharged as described above in Objection No. 10 in order to discourage Union activity generally and in an effort to make these employees ineligible to vote in the election.
Objection No. 13
On or about April 9, 2020, the Employer conditioned severance pay for the employees described above in Objection No. 10 on execution of a severance agreement tending to restrain employees from assisting the Union in its organizing efforts.
Objection No. 14
In about late June 2020, the Employer distributed to employees materials urging them to vote against the Union in the election. In this communication, the Employer threatened to withhold the regular wage increases described above in Objection No. 1 if the Union becomes the employees’ bargaining representative.
Objection No. 15
In the same materials described above in Objection No. 14, the Employer communicated to employees that unionization would be futile.
The Young Jurks podcast:
Fabricio DaSilva, Vice President of UFCW 1445 on the Brookline union election at NETA as well as their campaign to bring back COVID19 hazard pay for Stop & Shop workers and those employed in healthcare.
NETA employee fired for union organizing
My interview with US Senator Ed Markey on unions and cannabis
NETA employees fired for union organizing? An interview with three former NETA, Parallel cannabis dispensary workers who were fired after organizing for a union
Photo by Michael Fischer from Pexels