Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
Q&A
Debate over NLRB complaints and labor violations at Cablevision
6:54:25
·
135 sec
Council Member De La Rosa presses Randy Mastro on his knowledge and beliefs about labor violations at Cablevision during the 2014 hearing. Mastro maintains that he was not directly involved in NLRB proceedings and was only there to represent Cablevision's position on the appropriateness of the Council hearing.
- De La Rosa questions Mastro's past statements about NLRB complaints against Cablevision
- Mastro emphasizes his limited role in the labor dispute aspects of the case
- Discussion on whether Mastro believed labor violations were occurring at Cablevision
Carmen De La Rosa
6:54:25
And you did indeed assert that there were indeed no complaints issued against cable vision.
6:54:32
When we both know that in order for the NLRB to issue a complaint, there has to be an investigation.
6:54:39
That leads to that complaint.
6:54:41
You didn't say that.
6:54:42
But my next question
6:54:52
Did you believe that there were no labor violations happening?
6:55:06
I have a pen where you're
6:55:18
This is the message I sent years
6:55:25
understand what you asserted, Mister Matthew.
6:55:28
I'm asking you if you believed.
6:55:30
If you believed, not if you asserted at the time because trust me, I saw the hearing and I read the transcript.
6:55:35
I know what you asserted.
6:55:36
I'm asking, did you believe that there were no labor violations happening at the time?
6:55:48
Yes, sir.
6:55:49
No one's a fight.
6:56:02
Why do you believe that holding the certification vote with a pending NLRB complaint of unfair labor practices is not union busting.
6:56:14
Do you believe that it's union busting?
Randy Mastro
6:54:43
I think I don't think I misspoke, but but but go ahead.
6:54:46
I I was simply there to assert that this was a private labor dispute, and it will be worked out at the NLRP.
6:54:56
I did not assert one way or the other the ultimate outcome of whatever was going out with the LDR B.
6:55:02
I asserted that the counsel holding a hearing on it.
6:55:07
having of protesters from the CWA seemed like something that certainly cable vision was concerned about why a private labor dispute would have generated that.
6:55:17
But Yes.
6:55:19
ago when I was appearing on behalf of a client.
6:55:22
And I stated the client's position, And, you know, that was I
6:55:43
I can only speak to, you know, what I knew.
6:55:49
What I knew personally, and I had no actual involvement in the underlying representation on the labor dispute.
6:55:56
Yes or no?
6:55:57
So I did not come to that hearing with a position on that issue.
6:56:13
I didn't.
6:56:16
I don't.
6:56:17
There hadn't been a certification.
6:56:19
And the NLRP was going to sort out what the legal rights of the parties were That's why I was appearing for the very limited purpose of saying that, why is the council holding a hearing on this when this is before the NLRP?
6:56:32
And the NLRP will decide who's right and sorted out and then it will get resolved.
6:56:37
That's the only thing I did.
6:56:39
That's the only thing I said.