Sign in Subscribe
News

🗞️ A Federal Judge Finds ASARCO Broke Labor Law, but Hands Unions a Partial Defeat

An NLRB administrative law judge ruled that ASARCO LLC committed multiple post-strike labor violations but found the 2019 walkout was an economic strike, not one caused by the company's misconduct, limiting the remedies available to hundreds of workers.

onthelaborfront

onthelaborfront

— 4 min read
Share
🗞️ A Federal Judge Finds ASARCO Broke Labor Law, but Hands Unions a Partial Defeat

A federal labor judge dealt a split verdict to ASARCO LLC and the unions representing its workers on April 20, 2026, resolving a dispute that has shadowed the copper producer and its Mexican parent, Grupo México, for nearly seven years.

Administrative Law Judge Sharon Levinson Steckler of the National Labor Relations Board issued a 243-page decision finding that ASARCO had committed a range of violations against its workforce, while simultaneously rejecting the unions' core argument that the company had bargained in bad faith before a strike that upended operations at five mining and processing facilities in Arizona and Texas. The ruling carries significant financial and legal consequences for both sides.

The dispute has its roots in contract negotiations that began in 2018, when ASARCO and a coalition of eight unions, led by the United Steelworkers, sought to replace a labor agreement covering roughly 1,800 hourly workers. Talks grew acrimonious over wages frozen since 2009, proposed pension cuts, and rising health care costs that workers said the company was shifting onto them. On October 13, 2019, workers voted to strike after rejecting the company's last, best and final offer.

The central legal question was whether ASARCO had bargained in bad faith, a finding that would have transformed the walkout into an "unfair labor practice strike" and required the company to reinstate all strikers ahead of any replacement workers hired during the stoppage. Judge Steckler concluded that, despite years of fractious negotiations, ASARCO had not crossed that threshold. The parties had reached a genuine impasse before ASARCO imposed its final terms in late 2019, she found, and the strike was accordingly classified as an economic strike. That distinction sharply limits the reinstatement rights of the more than 700 workers who participated.

The company's victory on that central question, however, did not spare it from a lengthy list of findings that it violated federal labor law in the months and years after the unions ended the strike. When the United Steelworkers and its coalition made an unconditional offer to return to work on July 6, 2020, ASARCO continued recruiting and offering jobs to replacement workers, a violation of the standard established in Laidlaw Corp. by the NLRB. The judge also found that a private security firm hired by ASARCO had illegally video-recorded workers on picket lines at the Mission and Silver Bell facilities.

The post-strike conduct at the company's Amarillo, Texas copper rod facility and its Hayden, Arizona smelter drew some of the sharpest criticism in the decision. Judge Steckler found that ASARCO reduced shifts, modified job duties, and laid off workers at those sites without first bargaining with the union as required by law. When the company terminated the seniority of laid-off Amarillo and Hayden employees in September 2021, she found, it did so without providing the union adequate notice or an opportunity to negotiate.

Two individual workers at the Mission Mine were singled out for relief. Ben Lucero, a haul truck driver, and Eli Laracuente, a diesel mechanic, were found to have been unlawfully suspended and discharged in retaliation for their union activities and strike participation. Both are entitled to reinstatement and back pay under the order. The judge dismissed similar claims involving several other workers, finding that their terminations were supported by legitimate business reasons unrelated to their union involvement.

The remedies ordered against ASARCO are broad. The company must reinstate and make whole all employees affected by the unlawful conduct, restore seniority where it was improperly broken, and bargain with the union over a series of post-strike changes it imposed unilaterally, including alterations to payroll dates and the introduction of fatigue monitoring systems in haul trucks. The decision is subject to appeal and review by the full NLRB board in Washington.

Key Points

  • Strike classified as economic, not an unfair labor practice strike; the unions' primary argument was rejected and ASARCO was found to have reached a valid bargaining impasse before implementing its final offer
  • Post-strike hiring violations: ASARCO unlawfully continued recruiting replacement workers after the union's unconditional offer to return on July 6, 2020, violating the Laidlaw doctrine
  • Illegal surveillance: A security firm hired by ASARCO video-recorded workers picketing at the Mission and Silver Bell facilities in violation of the National Labor Relations Act
  • Amarillo and Hayden violations: Unilateral shift reductions, job duty changes, layoffs, and seniority terminations at the Texas and Arizona facilities were all found unlawful
  • Two workers wrongfully fired: Lucero and Laracuente at Mission Mine are entitled to reinstatement and back pay after being terminated in retaliation for union activity
  • Unilateral changes: Payroll date modifications and haul-truck fatigue monitoring systems were implemented without bargaining to impasse
  • Remedy: Reinstatement, back pay, seniority restoration, mandatory bargaining, and facility-wide notice posting for 60 consecutive days
  • Still pending: The decision is subject to appeal and review by the full NLRB Board in Washington

Primary Source Author: Administrative Law Judge Sharon Levinson Steckler

Primary Source: ASARCO LLC, JD(SF)-05-26, NLRB Division of Judges (April 20, 2026)

Primary Source Link: NLRB Case 28-CA-255235

Read more