Press Conference Rebroadcast time: 1:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m., Satellite: IA 6 (formerly Telstar 6),
Transponder: C-13 (C-band space), Audio: 6.2 and 6.8, Downlink Frequency: 3960 VerticalSan Jose, California (September 28, 2005) – A group of California teachers and university professors today asked the U.S. District Court to issue a temporary restraining order and to schedule a hearing for a preliminary injunction to prevent two large statewide teacher unions from spending a mandatory dues increase without due process in order to influence the upcoming special election. At a dramatic press conference in Sacramento last Thursday, the teachers and professors announced their First Amendment class action lawsuit challenging forced dues increases levied against more than 350,000 teachers and professors statewide. More than 100 screaming union militants filed out of union political headquarters buildings and encircled the press conference to drown out and intimidate the classroom teachers who were speaking to the media about their allegations against the union hierarchy. The suit, filed with the free legal assistance of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, challenges the use of a $60-per-teacher mandatory dues increase imposed by California Teacher Association (CTA) officials and a 10 percent mandatory dues increase imposed by California Faculty Association (CFA) officials that are earmarked for efforts to defeat Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s propositions on the ballot on November 8th. Foundation attorneys argue that an injunction is necessary because only swift action can prevent the irreparable infringement of the teachers’ constitutional rights. The results of an election cannot be undone. Since September 1, CTA officials have written checks to several campaign committees totaling $23 million from a loan that is secured by guarantees of higher compulsory dues paid by educators as a job condition. Earlier in the summer, CTA officials announced another $22 million in expenditures. The CTA’s first deduction of the forced dues increase is scheduled to occur on September 30 at which time most teachers will first learn of the dues increase. Like many public servants, the six named plaintiffs object to paying for union political activities with which they disagree. They seek an order certifying their suit as a class action for all CTA members and nonmembers and all CFA nonmembers. The educators seek to block the further use of the special dues increase until every teacher and professor is given full disclosure of the union’s expenditures and notice of their right to object and obtain a refund. The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge James Ware. “Union officials seem to think rank-and-file educators are there to serve as the union’s ATM machine to finance its political agenda,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the Foundation. The suit relies on the rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, including the Foundation-won Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986). In Hudson, the high court ruled that all “potential objectors” to forced union dues assessments have due process rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to be notified of how their forced union dues are spent and to be given an opportunity to prevent the spending of their dues for non-collective bargaining purposes.

Press Conference Rebroadcast time: 1:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. KU Satellite SBS6, Analog Transponder 9, Audio 6.2/6.8, 11921Mhz, HorizontallySacramento, California (September 22, 2005) – A group of California teachers and professors today filed a statewide class-action lawsuit in federal court against the state’s largest teacher and faculty unions seeking to bar union officials from forcing more than 350,000 California educators to pay significant dues increases earmarked for political electioneering during this year’s special election. Filed by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Jose, the civil rights suit seeks to enjoin the use or further collection of a $60-per-teacher mandatory dues increase imposed by California Teacher Association (CTA) union officials and a 10 percent mandatory dues increase imposed by California Faculty Association (CFA) officials that are earmarked for efforts to defeat Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s ballot propositions. Since September 1, CTA union officials have written checks to several campaign committees totaling $23 million from a loan that is secured by guarantees of higher compulsory dues paid by educators as a job condition. Earlier in the summer, CTA officials announced another $22 million in expenditures. Like many public servants, the six named plaintiffs object to paying for union political activities with which they disagree, so they asked the Foundation for free legal assistance. They seek an order certifying their suit as a class action for all CTA members and nonmembers, and all CFA nonmembers. The educators also ask for an injunction to block the use or further collection of the special dues increase and an order that every teacher and professor be given notice and allowed to obtain a refund, plus interest. “Union officials are shamelessly fleecing rank-and-file educators to finance a political agenda that many educators oppose,” stated National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “No one in America should be forced to join or pay dues to a union they do not support. This case demonstrates how egregiously union officials abuse the special privileges they have obtained under California law.” In the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986), the high court ruled that public employees have due process rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to be notified, as potential objectors, of how their forced union dues are spent, and how to prevent the spending of their dues for non-collective bargaining purposes. However, the CTA and CFA unions have failed to give educators any opportunity to object and have rebuffed those who have objected. To prevent the further violation of their constitutional rights, the teachers ask that the forced dues be placed into escrow, because, as Foundation attorneys note in their complaint, “Once the employees’ money is spent, contrary to their wishes, to affect the outcome of ballot propositions… the employees’ First Amendment rights are irretrievably lost.” For more information, contact Justin Hakes at (916) 844-4264 or Stefan Gleason at (916) 844-4265.

Knoxville, Tenn. (August 1, 2005) — The Court of Appeals of Tennessee has given a green-light to a Tennessee educator’s lawsuit challenging union officials’ practice of compelling teachers to support political activities as a condition of union membership. The appellate court agreed with arguments made by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys that the trial court improperly dismissed a lawsuit filed on behalf of Polk County teacher Dewey Esquinance. Mr. Esquinance is making a constitutional challenge to a statewide teacher union rule that forces teachers to resign from union membership and thereby sacrifice their voice in workplace matters in order to exercise their political and religious freedoms. Esquinance, with the help of Foundation attorneys, filed the suit in April 2003 against the National Education Association’s (NEA) affiliates, the Polk County Education Association and the Tennessee Education Association, in the state of Tennessee Circuit Court of Polk County. The appellate court ruled that the trial court must allow the suit to proceed. If Mr. Esquinance ultimately prevails, teachers will have a constitutional right to remain union members and withhold dues spent by the union on ideological activities. Currently, teachers must resign from union membership under the state’s Right to Work law in order to withhold dues. However, as non-members, teachers lose several privileges that union members enjoy, including voting on the collective bargaining agreement that binds them to certain terms and conditions of employment, as well as a voice in determining the criteria for teacher evaluations, control of sick bank donations, and access to teacher training. As a non-union member, Esquinance automatically forfeits these benefits. “It seems that NEA officials are not as concerned with representing employees as they are with shaking them down to finance a radical political agenda,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. Like many educators, Esquinance objects to many aspects of the NEA’s agenda for religious and political reasons, including the NEA’s stances promoting abortion, gun control, and special rights for homosexuals. Every year, the NEA spends millions of dollars in compulsory dues it collects in support of political views and candidates that many teachers find objectionable. Esquinance is challenging the membership dues based on the rights established by the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education. Under Abood and subsequent rulings, employees have a constitutional right to refuse to pay for union non-collective bargaining activities and ideological activities -- such as politics.