As Its Workers Organize, the Philadelphia Museum of Art Management Turns to an Infamous Anti-Union Law Firm

Way back in 1981, the law firm firm of Morgan, Lewis &
Bockius—better known as Morgan Lewis—was retained by the
Reagan administration to help craft its strategy to break the PATCO
air-traffic controllers union. That event is today remembered as
the opening shot in an
anti-labor offensive that has mauled the livelihoods of working
people up to this day. For its supporting role in the Reagan
Revolution, Morgan Lewis was paid $376,000, about $1 million in
today’s terms.

Even today, Morgan Lewis is somewhat infamous as a player in
advising big business on anti-union strategy. For instance, the
firm was a key player in
crafting attempts by McDonald’s to stop the “Fight for $15”
campaign. In fact, at the very same time the firm was pitching in
to stop fast food workers from getting a $15 minimum wage, its own
top lawyers were named by the Wall Street
Journal as members of the “$1,000-Plus-an-Hour Club,”
referring to the amount they bill.

Not so long ago, the firm was in the news when Donald
Trump nominated Morgan Lewis
partner John Ring, co-head of its Labor & Employment Practice
Group, to the National Labor
Relations Board (NLRB). There, Ring has presided over
rulings that, among other things, specifically make it harder for McDonald’s
workers to organize. In November, the NLRB’s staff staged a protest
against “management abuses” towards the agency’s own workers during
Ring’s tenure.

I bring all this up because the context helps give the full
weight to the following fact:
Morgan Lewis is the firm that the Philadelphia Museum of Art is
working with to deal with its employees’ unionization
drive.

Asked for comment, a museum spokesperson confirmed that it was
using Morgan Lewis for advice: “As is customary, the museum has
continued working with its longstanding outside counsel to help
guide us through the unionization process as governed by the
National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).”

On its own website, Morgan Lewis is pretty clear on what
kind of “guide” it might be: “In addition to assisting employers
during union organizing campaigns and related litigation, we help
clients promote positive employee relations, avoid union
penetration, and strategically shape bargaining units to minimize
potential union organizing victories.”

The goal, in short, is neutralizing worker activism.

PMA workers had achieved a “supermajority” of eligible workers
who supported the unionization drive, meaning a yes vote was
assured on the issue if it went forward promptly. The staff
had therefore hoped that museum management would quickly and
voluntarily accept the union.

Instead, workers learned on Monday via an all-staff email that
the museum was disputing some of the points of the union’s filing,
including the size and composition of the proposed bargaining
unit. Of course, one of the services Morgan Lewis advertises
is its ability to “strategically shape bargaining units to minimize
potential union organizing victories.”

Now the museum will take these disputes to the NLRB—where
the former head of Morgan Lewis’s union-busting arm is currently in
charge—before letting the vote go forward.

To workers, this looks as if the museum is “stalling to give
time to build up an anti-union campaign,” said Alex Kauffman, a
member of the organizing committee and a post-doctoral
curatorial fellow at the museum. “Morgan Lewis has said exactly
what they do, and PMA is using that exact playbook.”

Morgan Lewis has deep ties with the museum. It is a Gold-level corporate
supporter. Timothy W. Levin, a lawyer at Morgan Lewis who
specializes in finance cases, is
on the museum’s executive board.

The museum was already reeling from high-profile scandals
over failure to act on sexual harassment complaints and abusive
management, and was in “reset mode” trying to
quell staff rebellion. The union drive in part came out of the
solidarity between departments forged in that moment.

At the same time, the Philadelphia Museum of Art has yet to
undergo widespread layoffs in response to the current
shutdown. When my colleague Eileen Kinsella first reported on PMA’s
unionization drive back in May, one worker was quoted as saying:
“we’re very grateful for what the museum has been able to do for us
and we’re excited to work in collaboration with upper
management.”

What does this current bit of news say to me? That management
can’t be trusted, and that the workers’ main impulse is correct:
unionization can’t come fast enough.

The post As Its Workers Organize, the Philadelphia Museum of
Art Management Turns to an Infamous Anti-Union Law Firm
appeared first on artnet News.