Various allegations
Former workers at the Mirage in Las Vegas are taking action against their labor union, claiming employees at the now-closed property were not fully informed regarding the administration of their severance package.
The Las Vegas Review-Journal obtained the National Labor Relations Board filing from August through a public information request, and it details allegations relating to Culinary Local 226.
It claims the union “restrained and coerced employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act” through some of its actions.
not properly communicating the fine print for the severance options
These include not properly communicating the fine print for the severance options and failing to reply to repeated requests during the summer for a meeting to discuss the matter. The workers claim they only got a brief summary of the contract after its ratification, and it was several months before they received the complete breakdown.
Two types of packages
The Mirage closed its doors for the final time in July after operating for 34 years on the Las Vegas Strip, and the closure led to about 3,000 job losses. Hard Rock International is taking over the property and developing the Hard Rock Las Vegas, with the current opening date set for spring 2027.
received $2,000 for each year of service, as well as six months of pension and health fund contributions
The Culinary Local 226 is the biggest union on the Las Vegas Strip and represented the interests of about 1,700 Mirage workers. Employees received $2,000 for each year of service, as well as six months of pension and health fund contributions, with an alternative option of a smaller payout and a place on a priority hiring database for when the new property opens.
Confusion over the options
Some workers spoke to the Las Vegas Review-Journal about how the contracts weren’t properly explained, and people felt pushed into accepting the severance package as the alternative option of joining the rehiring list and taking less money was too risky.
While the filing doesn’t make any allegations against the property itself, the plaintiffs sent a letter to the casino’s management to request their cooperation with information requests regarding the case.