The decision of the regional NLRB director in the Foxwoods Casino case is here.
One interesting passage from this opinion:
“I find particularly unpersuasive the Employer’s claim, unsupported by record evidence, that “a strike against the Tribal Gaming Enterprise would severely disrupt the Tribe’s continuing ability to provide essential services” to its constituent members. As previously indicated, the Employer has annual gross revenues in excess of $1 billion, and approximately 98% of the Tribe’s revenues are derived from the operation of Foxwoods. Thus, approximately 2 percent of the Tribe’s annual income, at least $20,000,000, is derived from outside sources. The record does not indicate the Tribe’s capital reserves, or the amounts needed to fund any of its essential services. Therefore, even if the Employer were to face a protracted strike, there is no evidence that it would have insufficient revenues and/or capital to provide the Tribe’s 900 members with any essential public service.
But what about tribal casinos that don’t make that kind of money or have larger memberships? Hmmm….
Turtle Talk 
A tribal reservation is not a foreign country. It is a Federal Land Trust within these United States. And as such, it is not immune, above or unaffected by Federal regulations. If a tribe engages in commerce with non-tribal patrons and/or operates a business utilizing non-tribal employees, both those patrons and employees are protected by the rights and regulations of the Federal Government. Furthermore by Federal Statute, if a
Tribe has not negotiated specific exemptions, expressed within the Tribal/State Compact within the State the Tribe resides, then all State Laws, Restrictions and Regulations apply to the tribe as well. If a State agrees to such specific exemptions in its Compact, then a Tribe is immune to those specific regulations only, for a determinate amount of time. State tax relief for Tribal Members would be one such example of a specific exemption agreed upon by both parties.
Tribal Sovereignty is clearly defined and limited to how a tribe governs its own Tribal members on its Federal Land Trust. A tribe may emulate a government agency like OSHA, on their reservation, with specific regard for their Tribal members. The regulations for that tribal agency however MUST meet or exceed those of the agency which it mirrors. That being said, any tribal agency implemented to regulate its tribal members must provide more or equal protections for its members than those of the Federal or State agency it plans to replace. These allowances and tools of Tribal Self Governance are clearly defined and strictly limited too Tribal regulations for its Tribal members. They should not and do not apply to any Tribal authority over non-tribal citizens, patrons or employees on their Federal Land Trust.
Once you read the Connecticut State/Mashantucket Compact in its entirety, it becomes obvious, that there are no such exemptions negotiated, expressed or implied, that would relieve the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe from State regulations. Non-Tribal citizens, patrons and employees on Tribal Land in the State of Connecticut are now and have always been protected by and regulated through the State Agencies responsible for their well being. The substandard protections, labor regulation and safety regulation violations experienced at Foxwoods today, seem to have stemmed from inadequate oversight and blatant misinterpretations regarding both State and Federal authority. The State regulations regarding minimum wage, overtime, vacation, sick leave, military leave, No smoking in State businesses, health care requirements, retirement, ETC, ETC all apply at Foxwoods.
Employees and patrons alike all look forward to seeing teams of State and Federal regulators from every agency examining, identifying and correcting deficiencies in both Labor and Business practices at Foxwoods commercial ventures. Foxwoods has been exploiting its unfair, unregulated and arguably illegal business advantages, to the detriment of not only their patrons and employees, but local businesses and communities as well. The employees have been painfully aware of the effects of these oversights for years. It has taken the national media coverage of this struggle by the employees to obtain the Rights and Protections of an organized Labor force, to finally bring Foxwoods practices to light. God Bless these employees for their efforts in this David versus Goliath battle. Hopefully, State and Federal agencies will step up and aid them in this historic attempt to correct some of the unfairness in this country.
As a side note, I hope each employee receives immediate reimbursement for every hour they were paid below Connecticut State Minimum Wage. Since the Federal Statute clearly identifies that Foxwoods was never exempt from this Labor Law, the employees deserve retroactive wage increases and payment of these illegally reduced compensations plus any applicable interests accrued for the years they were withheld.
One thing I think is missing from this argument is that a tribal law already exists that would allow you to negotiate an employee deal outside of the auspices of federal and state law. It appears you place a heavy reliance on federal and state minimums and, under the current strategy of using the NLRA — that is all you will ever get, if you (and I mean here, the NLRB) win a long court battle (5 years or more).
Suppose you negotiate with the tribe now and cut a deal under tribal law. It might be better (or worse) than federal or state minimums. I think you’re right that management is noticing the national exposure this question is receiving. Now might be the time to organize under tribal law and use your newfound bargaining power generated by this national exposure.