Union Seeks to Return to Reliant Power Plant

Workers at a San Bernardino power plant bought by Houston-based Reliant Energy Inc. will vote Tuesday on whether to bring back the union that represented them when the facility was owned by Southern California Edison.

The rancorous campaign leading up to the vote illustrates one ancillary result of deregulation, which pushed the state’s three largest utilities to sell their generating plants.

Of a dozen plants sold by Rosemead-based Edison International, nine that were bought by Reliant and Virginia-based AES Corp. went nonunion over the last year. In contrast, Duke Energy Corp. and Mirant Corp. retained union work forces at five plants they bought from San Francisco-based Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

The change in Edison territory affected two union locals, but the harder hit by far was the Utility Workers Union of America, Local 246, which lost half its membership in a matter of months. The vote planned for Tuesday at the Etiwanda plant in San Bernardino, which has 34 eligible employees, is the first test of that union’s efforts to rebuild.

Organizers said the campaign has met with resistance. “It’s tough going,� local President Dan Davis said. “People are afraid of losing their jobs, and [Reliant] has a lot of money to throw around.�

This month, Reliant lost a similar battle at its Coolwater generating plant in Barstow, where employees voted to rejoin the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 47.

IBEW business agent Pat Lavin said that all 35 employees had signed union pledge cards, but that the company would not recognize the union without a federally supervised election. During the intervening months, employees were aggressively lobbied to reject the IBEW. “The union is only here for your money,� wrote plant manager Danny Ross in a June 1 letter to workers. “They did not offer you a job. I DID!�

The union barely won, by a vote of 17 to 15.

Several days later, Reliant announced an “extraordinary incentive program,� offering $500 to $2,000 per month to workers at California generating plants who meet basic production goals. There was one catch, however: The program, which runs through October, is not available to workers who are unionized or have filed a petition for a union election.

Davis said the offer had an immediate chilling effect on his local’s campaign at Etiwanda and dims the prospect of organizing other Reliant plants. “People have called us asking, can’t we put off the election until the summer’s over?� he said.

Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley said the program was intended to improve production during the difficult summer months, not to blunt the union campaign. “We have not used the letter to coerce employees but to inform them,� Wheatley said. “We are being upfront. . . . As a company, we are prohibited by law from improving existing wages or benefits during the course of a union campaign.�

A spokesman for the National Labor Relations Board said the offer fell into a gray area of labor law that would be examined by the agency if the union filed a grievance. Such an investigation would delay the vote, however.

In California, as across the nation, unions objected strenuously to deregulation, claiming the trend could lead to an erosion of wages and benefits as well as safety and reliability. The generators argued that deregulation would bring lower rates, greater choice for consumers and improved service.

The union hopes a victory Tuesday will build momentum for reorganizing other plants, but they concede it’s a tough fight for plants that were once theirs. “It’s like trying to move a mountain, one grain at a time,� said Dan Dominguez, an organizer for the Utility Workers Union of America.

Reliant shares fell 5 cents to close at $30.50 on the New York Stock Exchange.