Ralphs managers not guilty of misconduct during 2003 lockout

A federal jury found three former Ralphs managers not guilty yesterday in a case arising from the 2003 Southern California grocery strike. It is extremely rare for managers to be prosecuted for actions taken during a labor dispute. Here is some background on this case and conjecture on the jury’s reasons for acquittal.

For many years, the major grocery chains in Southern California (Vons, Albertsons and Ralphs) had an agreement that if a union called a “whipsaw” strike against one of the chains, the others would lockout their employees. In 2003, the UFCW called a strike at Vons. Ralphs and Albertsons locked out their employees, and they didn’t return to work until nearly four months later.

When there is a lockout, the employer cannot allow any employees to continue working. Otherwise, the lockout can be declared illegal and the locked out employees are entitled to back pay. After the lockout began, the union started collecting reports that employees were applying and being hired to work at Ralphs using fake names and social security numbers. The union, believing that managers were encouraging and condoning this evasion of the lockout, sought criminal charges against Ralphs.

After investigation, the U.S. Attorney determined that employees were being hired under false pretenses and brought a criminal indictment against Ralphs, which was ultimately settled before trial for $70 million. Indictments against eight individual managers were also brought. After plea deals, only three of the managers went on trial.

The three were not store managers, but higher level executives in charge of multiple stores. The government tried to prove that they participated in a conspiracy to facilitate the hiring of locked out employees. However, none of the three actually participated in hiring at individual stores, so the government probably had to argue from circumstantial evidence only – such as contending that the managers didn’t do enough to prevent locked out workers from being hired. Apparently, the defense didn’t even put on witnesses. They must have been confident the government failed to prove intent.