Labor board rules for Bigfoot Beverages in major strike ruling

This story has been updated with additional information from Bigfoot Beverages.

Bigfoot Beverages employees in Eugene who have been on strike for more than a year don’t have union protections, the National Labor Relations Board ruled this month.

The ruling by NLRB Acting Regional Director Janet Little marks a significant victory for the beverage distributor in its long-running dispute with drivers, warehouse workers and other employees who went on strike in September 2024 after failing to reach a new contract.

Little’s ruling states that the Teamsters union’s status as the exclusive bargaining representative of Eugene, Newport and Coos Bay Bigfoot employees is invalid, because a majority of covered employees voted in November 2024 to no longer be represented by the union.

Union-represented employees have long contended the decertification vote was illegitimate and spearheaded by company management. They allege the company got temporary employees it hired to replace striking workers to sign the petitions.

The NLRB ruling dismissed that claim.

“There was no evidence that (Bigfoot) was involved in the collection of the signatures,” the ruling said. “The signatures were collected following the expiration of the contract, and the signatures were verified.”

The Teamsters union has until Jan. 23 to appeal the ruling. The complaints are considered active until the window passes or appeal options are exhausted, an NLRB spokesman said.

Teamsters officials didn’t immediately return messages seeking comment. 

The labor saga has roiled Bigfoot’s Eugene operation, with picketers frequently lining McVay Highway in front of the company’s Eugene distribution center over the past 16 months. Both sides have accused the other of intimidation and threatening behavior.

Bigfoot has always maintained that federal law allowed the company to replace striking workers because their strike was economic in nature, rather than stemming from unfair labor practices.

It’s a critical distinction. Employers, under federal labor law, have more flexibility to hire replacement workers during a strike if the union’s intent is to gain economic concessions from an employer.

Little’s ruling cited an NLRB investigation into alleged threats against workers by Bigfoot, which determined “that at the time of these alleged threats, the employees were engaged in an economic strike.” 

The NLRB ruling dismissed seven complaints against Bigfoot by the union. They include claims the company interfered with employees’ rights to have union representatives present in investigatory interviews and that Bigfoot refused to provide information to the union. In both cases, Little ruled the union decertification rendered the cases moot since employees weren’t legally represented.

Eight other complaints filed by the union against Bigfoot since September 2024 are still listed as active in NLRB’s case registry. Seven of them allege that the company unlawfully surveilled employees, issued threats and asked about their support for the union. Another complaint, filed last May, alleges Bigfoot unilaterally changed workers’ contract terms and terms of employment.

“We are confident the NLRB will conclude Bigfoot’s actions were lawful – like how they ruled on the these seven complaints,” a company spokesperson said.

Bigfoot co-presidents Eric Forrest and Andy Moore hailed the dismissal rulings in a Jan. 14 letter to vendors.

“As you may remember, despite Bigfoot’s prolonged bargaining and exhaustive efforts to reach a resolution, union leadership did not allow members to vote on the last, best and final employer proposal,” the letter stated. “The proposal would have kept the existing team among the highest compensated in the beverage distribution industry. Even when Bigfoot offered to grandfather in current union members in the existing Teamsters pension plan, the union rejected the offer without taking a vote.” Their letter didn’t mention the other active cases.

Contract negotiations between Bigfoot and the union broke down in 2024 over the company’s plan to replace the workers’ pension with a 401(k). Bigfoot has called its compensation package generous, noting that the plan included a 9% employer contribution accompanied by wage increases. Union officials call the package a bait-and-switch, contending that employees would have to invest their entire wage increase into the 401(k) plan to get close to the value of their pension.

Bigfoot employs about 430 people in Oregon, up from 390 people six years ago.

“We are pleased that the actions we took in the best interest of our team members have been verified as being legal and just,” Bigfoot’s letter to vendors said. “We will continue to partner with your business and remain committed to our community.”

Eight picketers milled about outside Bigfoot’s Eugene distribution center Thursday morning. One held a sign reading, “This company is unfair to union workers.”

A picketer who declined to give his name said he was aware of the ruling, but noted that other complaints against Bigfoot are still open.

“We’re deciding what our next steps are going to be,” he said. “We’re keeping on the line.”