What happens when environmental justice nonprofit workers unionize?

An internal union crisis that began five years ago raises core questions still applicable today: How much power should workers have in working conditions? And what happens when workers ask a nonprofit to apply its public values and justice inside its own workplace?

In 2021, a nonprofit built around environmental justice and community power found itself caught in an organizing campaign unfolding from within. The Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition (OVEC) was a longtime Appalachian environmental organization famously focused on issues like mountaintop-removal coal mining and fossil-fuel development.

What the organization probably didn’t expect was to find itself in a labor-law violation dispute and unionized workers. In March of that year, OVEC workers announced that they had organized as the OVEC Union with the Industrial Workers of the World. What followed was months of conflict, which resulted in the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) certifying the union in July.

Reconstructing the dispute

The organizing effort at OVEC began publicly with workers announcing that they had organized their union (OVECU). OVEC Project Coordinator Dustin White said in a statement, “Having a union is a logical next step in supporting our organization as our organization continues to support our communities. Unionizing only strengthens our commitment to the vital work we do at the crossroads of environmental, social, and labor justice.”

The group began with a request for voluntary recognition to the board of directors and key demands including a standardized pay scale, an equitable discipline policy, and the right to union representation. Workers had said that the union would bring OVEC’s stated commitments and belief that all workers should benefit from the right to union representation in their place of employment, regardless of current working conditions.

But the nonprofit’s directors did not recognize the group at this initial request, and the dispute quickly escalated. According to local reporting by the Charleston-Gazette Mail, the board suspended the director of organizing, Brendan Muckian-Bates, and project coordinator, Dustin White. On Earth Day, April 22, workers staged a one-day strike to demand recognition.

OVECU filed an unfair labor practice claim with the NLRB, which ruled that OVEC had unlawfully suspended and discharged one employee and discharged another because of their unionizing efforts, which was a protected concerted activity. In July 2021, workers voted in an NLRB-supervised election to certify the union.

They were asking for the same empowerment the nonprofit strove to give to others.

Four months later, in November, OVEC’s board voted 10-1 to dissolve the 34-year-old organization.

In a statement, OVEC said, “We believe the pandemic—which prevented us from meeting in person—contributed to the unraveling of trust within OVEC. The spread of misinformation through social media also played a role in OVEC’s current situation.”

Tension between a public mission and an internal workplace

The OVEC dispute has an interesting and ironic core tension. The question the dispute demands of nonprofits is this: What happens when your commitments to justice and empowerment are tested inside your own workplace? OVEC described its work as supporting and empowering voices in the community. Its stated values also included fairness, inclusiveness, and opposition to the exploitation of workers and community members.

Workers organizing can expose questions about power that traditional nonprofit governance structures do not always answer.

When OVEC workers announced their union drive in 2021, they were merely connecting that effort to the organization’s values. They were asking for the same empowerment the nonprofit strove to give to others.

This is not saying that OVEC didn’t live up to its mission. Instead, the conflict illustrates a recurring challenge for mission-driven organizations: Public commitments do not automatically translate into internal systems for workers.

What worker organizing can reveal about nonprofit governance

Workers organizing can expose questions about power that traditional nonprofit governance structures do not always answer. A board will oversee finances, legal responsibilities, and executive leadership. But workers have very little power over the decisions that affect them in the workplace.

Unions introduce a different type of accountability where employees can negotiate over working conditions, pay, and other workplace policies. This is particularly important for nonprofit workers.

NPQ reported in 2026 that one of the core tensions that exists in the nonprofit sector is that while employees may support the vision, that vision doesn’t pay the bills. Many nonprofit staff face burnout, stress, and high turnover rates. Nonprofit workers are paid less than for-profit workers in similar positions, up to 25 percent less in some cases. Unionization can help nonprofit workers in this regard.

The OVEC dispute reveals that workers weren’t merely raising individual workplace complaints—they were trying to establish a formal role in decisions that were directly affecting them. They also force us to ask how much voice the people carrying out a nonprofit’s mission should have in determining how that same work is structured.

Before workplace conflicts become crises

Preventing workplace conflict doesn’t mean eliminating disagreements. It means creating a structure that allows employees to raise concerns and leadership to respond, be clear about the roles in an organization. Everyone needs to understand how they can contribute and participate in the decision-making process.

Collaborative and respectful working environments can be considered a part of organizational governance. Experts also urge nonprofits to identify the root causes of conflict and preempt them before they affect the entire team.

The OVEC dispute shows why those structures matter. The workers organizing the campaign focused on issues around pay and representation in workplace decisions. For organizations that emphasize participation and community power, worker input can be incorporated into governance through formal mechanisms like staff committees.

Lessons for nonprofits

Workers organizing can be a sign that employees want more than the opportunity to express themselves. They want a formal sharing mechanism. Nonprofit boards and leaders should understand that this doesn’t automatically mean their workers do not support their goals.

OVEC’s dispute should teach nonprofits to ask themselves the following questions:

• Do our workers have meaningful platforms to raise concerns?
• Are our compensation and workplace policies transparent?
• Do our public organizational values reflect in our internal decision-making processes?

The biggest lesson for nonprofit leaders and boards is that if you’re advocating for communities to have a greater voice in the decisions affecting their lives, your workers may ask whether that voice exists within your internal structures too.