Auto Union Hit with Federal Charges For Bullying Nurses Seeking to Remove Union

**Toledo, OH (July 31, 2006)** – For the second time in four months, United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials face federal labor board charges for violating the rights of nurses at St. Vincent Mercy Medical Center. The latest charge, filed by St. Vincent nurse Amy Anderson, details union officials’ campaign of bullying and intimidation as Anderson and others sought to collect signatures from their co-workers to throw the unwanted union out of their workplace.

The nurse’s unfair labor practice charge against the UAW union and its Local 12, filed with the assistance of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, lists numerous examples of union agents’ “thuggish and unlawful activities” including surveillance of nurses, writing down license plate numbers, stalking employees, massing around employees who sought to sign the decertification petition, verbal and physical intimidation of nurses and threats against employees seeking decertification.

The alleged harassment took place at and around the medical center including in the cafeteria, parking lots and even in bathrooms.

Despite the union officials’ organized campaign of unlawful intimidation, the nurses were able to collect signatures from 30 percent of employees – the minimum necessary to trigger a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) supervised decertification election. Once the signatures are certified by the NLRB Region 8 Director in Cleveland, the Board will hold a secret ballot election through which the health care professionals can rid their workplace of the abusive union.

“UAW union officials have unleashed a shameless campaign of intimidation upon St. Vincent nurses in their lust to preserve the flow of forced union dues,” said Foundation vice president Stefan Gleason. “Given such hostility for the rights of the very rank-and-file nurses that UAW officials claim to ‘represent,’ it comes as no surprise that many nurses are leading the effort to show them the door.”

Previously, four nurses from St. Vincents filed federal charges with the Board against the UAW union and its Toledo Local 12 for violating their rights by threatening to have nurses fired, despite failing to inform the employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership and the right to pay a reduced fee in lieu of full union dues. Under the Foundation-won United States Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck, union officials must inform workers of their right to remain nonmembers or resign from formal union membership and to refrain from paying for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities.

Tired of union officials’ mistreatment, a group of nurses formed “Nurses For A Union-Free St. Vincents” (www.NursesKnowTheTruth.bravehost.com) with the goal of decertifying the unwanted automotive union.

St. Vincent Nurses Slap Automotive Union with Federal Charges, Seek to Throw Out Union

**Toledo, OH (April 21, 2006)** – With the assistance of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, four nurses from the St. Vincent Mercy Medical Center in Toledo have filed federal charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 8 Director in Cleveland against the United Auto Workers (UAW) union and its Toledo Local 12 for violating their rights.

The charges detail how UAW union officials have used a compulsory unionism clause in their contract with the medical center to threaten to have nurses fired, despite failing to inform the employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership and the right to pay a reduced fee in lieu of dues. Under the Foundation-won United States Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck, union officials must inform workers of their right to remain nonmembers or resign from formal union membership and to refrain from paying for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities.

In addition to their “pay-up-or-be-fired” threats, union officials have also recently begun demanding forced union dues from per diem nurses without informing them of their rights.

The medical professionals also charge automotive union officials with misleading nurses into filling out UAW membership cards that “irrevocably” designate the UAW as their exclusive representative in all employment matters, flouting the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Foundation-supported case of Pattern Makers v. National Labor Relations Board, which affirmed the right of private sector employees to resign their formal union membership at any time. The union cards also require the employee to pledge “true and faithful Allegiance to the International (UAW) Union.”

Frustrated by their treatment at the hands of union officials, a group of nurses have created a website called “Nurses For A Union Free St. Vincents” (www.NursesKnowTheTruth.bravehost.com) with the goal of ridding their medical center of the unwanted automotive union. According to federal labor law, if 30 percent of the nurses in the autoworkers union collective bargaining unit sign the decertification petition, the NLRB will hold an election where the nurses can vote the union out. However, if a majority of the nurses sign the petition the hospital can voluntarily drop its recognition of the union.

“UAW union officials have shown their willingness to break any law in their never-ending mission to corral more St. Vincent nurses into paying forced union dues,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Given such disregard for the rights of the very rank-and-file employees that UAW officials claim to represent, it comes as no surprise that many nurses are leading an effort to show them the door.”

Judge Certifies Saint-Gobain Employees’ Election to Throw Out UAW Union

**Boston, MA (March 28, 2006)** – Landing a decisive blow in a three-year battle involving scores of union legal maneuvers, an administrative law judge yesterday certified an election long held in limbo in which Saint-Gobain Abrasives employees voted to remove the United Auto Workers (UAW) union. The judge found UAW union officials’ last-ditch attempts to circumvent worker free choice at the massive Worcester manufacturing facility to be unavailing. The employees received free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.

After a determined group of workers filed to decertify the UAW, union lawyers exploited National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) procedures to block a vote for two years. Ultimately, believing they had the votes to win, the union waived their “blocking” charges and allowed the vote to proceed in January 2005. But Saint-Gobain employees voted by a margin of 350 to 309 to terminate the union’s status as the monopoly bargaining representative at the plant. Shortly after the election results rolled in, UAW union officials filed a series of desperate objections to the results, specifically targeting the Foundation and a group of dissenting Saint-Gobain workers.

In their initial response filed at the NLRB regional office, Foundation attorneys pointed out that union officials provided no evidence supporting their objections concerning the Foundation and dissenting workers as law requires, making those claims too “vague and incomprehensible” to answer. In his decision, released yesterday, the judge agreed that no evidence supported those claims, and ruled that union officials should not be permitted to obtain a rerun simply because they do not like the outcome.

“This ruling should put an end to the union officials’ shameless attempts to cling to power,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “While we are pleased that the employees’ wishes are finally being respected, this lengthy legal battle vividly demonstrates how the NLRB’s bureaucratic procedures are stacked against employee free choice.”

A decertification election has only one purpose and effect: to remove a union as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees. Under the National Labor Relations Act, if 30 percent or more of the employees in a bargaining unit sign a decertification petition, the NLRB should conduct a secret ballot election to determine if a majority of the employees wish to throw the union out.

With the insufficient objections dismissed and the decertification vote official, Saint-Gobain employees will be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment and be rewarded on their individual merit. Under the law, UAW union officials would have to wait at least one year before embarking on any new attempt to corral Saint-Gobain workers into union ranks.

Ashtabula, OH (February 24, 2006) – Facing intense employee opposition to their monopoly bargaining status, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) District 1199 officials this week abandoned all claims to represent workers at Ashtabula County Community Head Start. Union officials informed the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) yesterday that they no longer wished to represent employees at Head Start after battling an employee revolt for more than a year. The SEIU’s abandonment of Head Start comes in response to an employee-requested decertification election – which would have been held today – to throw out the unpopular union. With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, Peggy Swartzfager filed the decertification petition, signed by over 75 percent of her coworkers, in early 2005 after SEIU officials had failed for more than a year to obtain a collective bargaining agreement with Head Start. To thwart the election, union officials scrambled to reach a final agreement and filed two unfair labor practice charges against the employer. The contract was not favored by many rank-and-file workers, particularly since it included a requirement that all employees pay union dues or be fired from their jobs. SEIU officials filed the unfair labor practice charges against Head Start in an effort to exploit NLRB procedures to obtain an indefinite postponement of the decertification election. Notwithstanding these postponement tactics, the NLRB scheduled an election for the workers for February 24. To avoid a public relations black eye, SEIU officials disclaimed their monopoly bargaining contract before Head Start employees voted out the unwanted union, granting approximately 40 workers freedom to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment – and earn rewards based on individual merit. “SEIU officials tucked tail and ran knowing that Head Start workers were going to vote them out,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “About to lose thousands of dollars in compulsory union dues, union officials packed up and left before these workers handed them an embarrassing election defeat.” Under the National Labor Relations Act, if 30 percent or more of the employees in a bargaining unit sign a decertification petition, the NLRB should conduct a secret ballot election to determine if a majority of the employees wish to decertify the union and stop it from any further monopoly bargaining activities.

San Francisco, Calif. (December 22, 2005) – With help from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, a grape picker employed by Gallo of Sonoma Wine appealed to the California State Supreme Court to order a counting of ballots cast by over 300 Gallo workers in a union decertification election that occurred nearly three years ago. While the workers obtained an election to rid their workplace of the unwanted union, United Farm Workers of America (UFW) union officials have put a halt to a counting of the votes by filing unfair labor practice charges alleging unlawful employer interference. Roberto Parra, a Gallo grape picker, appealed a perfunctory ruling by the Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District not to review a decision by California Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB). The ALRB had held – in conflict with related federal labor statutes – that minimal employer interference in an election could be grounds to throw out an election without ever ascertaining the employees’ wishes. In 2003, Parra filed a petition for the decertification election, which would have removed the UFW union as the workers’ monopoly representative. Over 30% of the workers in the bargaining unit signed the petition requesting an election to throw out the unwanted union. “Two wrongs don’t make a right. UFW union officials should not be allowed to thwart employee free choice because of a few technical violations by their employer,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Many Gallo workers want no part of this union, but UFW officials won’t take no for an answer and are abusing the process to maintain their privileged position.” Foundation attorneys point out that the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act is modeled after the National Labor Relations Act, which proscribes that employer interference with an employee election must be substantial in order to justify that the result be set aside. While Parra does not dispute wrongdoing by Gallo officials leading up to the election, he cites that such behavior should not negate the exercise of the employees’ free will. “The sins of the father should not be visited upon the children,” said Gleason. If the decertification election ballots are counted and a majority of the employees voted against the union, UFW union officials would lose their special privilege to act as the monopoly bargaining representative of over 300 Gallo employees. Those workers then would be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment and could be rewarded on their individual merit.

Rochester, NY (December 6, 2005) – Five Monroe County probation officers filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court today with help from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys against two government unions for violating their First Amendment rights. The probation officers accuse officials of the Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) union and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union of deliberately violating their First Amendment and due process rights by seizing forced union dues from their paychecks while refusing them a legally mandated audit of union expenditures. The five officers, led by David Scheffer, filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York seeking an injunction preventing the further collection of forced union dues, as well as full refunds and punitive damages. The officers’ suit seeks similar relief for all nonmember public employees represented by CSEA union affiliates throughout the state of New York, a number believed to be in the thousands. Additionally, the officers charge the unions with spending their forced dues on union organizing drives, despite their objections. “Employees should not have to go to federal court to stop use of their forced union dues for non-bargaining activities,” stated Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “However, as long as public employees in New York labor under forced unionism, these abuses by union officials will inevitably continue.” Since at least November 2002, CSEA and AFSCME union officials have illegally seized forced dues from nonmember public employees without providing a legally mandated independent audit of how the fee is calculated. Foundation attorneys point out that union officials are spending a significant portion of the forced dues seized from nonmember employees on expenses not related to collective bargaining. The actions of CSEA and AFSCME union officials violate the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, which requires union officials to provide public employees that refrain from formal union membership with an audit of union expenditures. Such audits are intended to prevent the use of public employees’ forced union dues for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as politics and union organizing.

Gaffney, S.C. (August 12, 2005) – Facing embarrassing prosecution by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for unlawfully blocking an employee wage increase to coerce Gaffney-based Freightliner/Daimler-Chrysler workers to support unionization, the United Auto Workers (UAW) union and Freightliner today agreed to end the unlawful practices. UAW and Freightliner officials inked the settlement agreement with the NLRB after the NLRB’s General Counsel issued a formal complaint in response to unfair labor practice charges brought by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys for Freightliner employees. The NLRB issued a consolidated complaint earlier this week against both the union and Freightliner which was followed by the issuance of subpoenas that might have uncovered additional evidence of illegal union and company collaboration. The settlement requires company and union officials to post conspicuous notices throughout the Gaffney facility that union officials will not accept unlawful assistance from Freightliner in future unionization attempts, and that no future wage increases will unlawfully be withheld at the behest of union officials. “UAW officials raced to cover their tracks once they realized that the government was serious about holding them to account for coercing employees,” stated Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union and company officials have worked hand in glove to try to turn Freightliner workers into union dues payers.” Freightliner employees David Roach and Mike Ivey originally asked their Foundation attorneys to file charges in 2003 after UAW officials vetoed the long-scheduled and promised pay increase, and effectively required a freeze on pay raises at the Gaffney plant, apparently until such time as the employees agreed to unionization. The UAW union and Freightliner had a so-called “card check” or “neutrality” agreement that required the company to actively assist the UAW in its efforts to obtain signatures from employees on union authorization cards. In their charge found to be meritorious by the NLRB General Counsel, employees alleged that they “have been and are being threatened that they will get no raises unless and until they agree to unionization by the ‘company union’ known as the UAW,” even though the union enjoys little support from rank-and-file workers. In fact, approximately 70 percent of the plant’s employees had even signed and submitted a petition stating that they reject union affiliation and prefer to negotiate directly with company officials over wages and benefits. The NLRB complaint alleged that the company and union engaged in unlawful and coercive conduct that interfered with employees’ rights to refrain from concerted union activity. NLRB prosecutors alleged that not only was the withholding of a pay increase unlawful, but also that the granting of the pay increase at a later time after telling the employees that it had been authorized by the union was similarly unlawful.

Gaffney, S.C. (August 10, 2005) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel has decided to prosecute the United Auto Workers (UAW) union for unlawfully blocking a wage increase, thereby coercing Gaffney-based Freightliner/Daimler-Chrysler workers to support the union during a unionization campaign. Issuing a formal complaint in response to unfair labor practice charges brought by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys for Freightliner employees, NLRB’s Region 11 Office in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, will seek an order against both Freightliner and the UAW for unfair labor practices at an August 22 trial. The NLRB issued a consolidated complaint against both the union and Freightliner after the union’s officials failed to sign a settlement agreement that had been proposed by the NLRB. Freightliner employees David Roach and Mike Ivey originally asked their Foundation attorneys to file charges in 2003 after UAW officials vetoed the long-scheduled and promised pay increase, and effectively required a freeze on pay raises at the Gaffney plant, apparently until such time as the employees agreed to unionization. The UAW union and Freightliner had a so-called “card check” or “neutrality” agreement that required the company to actively assist the UAW in its efforts to obtain signatures from employees on union authorization cards. In their charge found to be meritorious by the NLRB General Counsel, employees allege that they “have been and are being threatened that they will get no raises unless and until they agree to unionization by the ‘company union’ known as the UAW,” even though the union enjoys little support from rank-and-file workers. In fact, approximately 70 percent of the plant’s employees had even signed and submitted a petition stating that they reject union affiliation and prefer to negotiate directly with company officials over wages and benefits. The petition stated in part that the undersigned employees “recognize the destructive and self-serving behavior of the UAW, and its documented role in union violence, union corruption, and plant closures caused by featherbedding and other uneconomic union work rules.” The NLRB’s complaint alleges that the company and union engaged in unlawful and coercive conduct that interfered with employees’ rights to refrain from concerted union activity. NLRB prosecutors allege that not only was the withholding of a pay increase unlawful, but also that the granting of the pay increase at a later time after telling the employees that it had been authorized by the union was similarly unlawful. “This is just the latest example of UAW and Freightliner officials working hand-in-glove to corral workers into union ranks whether they like it or not,” stated Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Freightliner and UAW officials have a cozy relationship that has resulted in the trampling of employee rights, not only in Gaffney, but also in High Point, North Carolina.” In neighboring North Carolina, the UAW union’s organizing techniques continue to grab headlines through a high profile controversy at the Freightliner-owned Thomas Built Buses facility in High Point. A group of workers at that facility recently filed a motion with the NLRB in Washington, DC, to allow them to challenge alleged election misconduct by Freightliner that occurred at the last minute.

Goshen, Ind. (July 7, 2005) – Approximately 200 employees at Cequent Towing Product’s Goshen facility have filed a “deauthorization” petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) asking the agency to hold an election to rid their work place of mandatory union dues. The employees filed the petition with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys after the agency has failed for 15 months to address an earlier petition for an election to throw out the union as the Cequent workers’ monopoly representative altogether. While the majority of Cequent workers who signed the earlier “decertification” petition were awaiting an NLRB election to throw out the union that had been imposed upon them without even the basic protections of a secret ballot election, Cequent entered into a forced unionism contract with the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) union, authorizing the firing of any Cequent worker who refuses to pay forced union dues. Under the National Labor Relations Act, employees have the right to call for a deauthorization election at any time. If 30% or more of the employees in the bargaining unit sign a deauthorization petition, the NLRB will conduct a secret ballot election to determine if a majority of the employees wish to cancel the forced union dues clause and restore employees’ freedom to decide whether to join or pay dues to the union. “Cequent and USWA officials have negotiated away the freedom of the company’s employees,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Meanwhile, the NLRB has stood idly by while USWA officials cemented themselves in place and helped themselves to forced dues from workers’ paychecks.” In March 2004, more than 230 workers signed the “decertification” petition, which was given to Cequent before it recognized the USWA union as their “exclusive bargaining representative.” If a decertification election is allowed and is successful, all Ceuqent employees then would be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment. In June 2004, the NLRB in Washington, DC, voted 3-2 to take up the Cequent case and consider whether union-opposition petitions signed by a majority of employees may be completely ignored during a so-called “card check” organizing drive. Workers at the facility found themselves unionized by the USWA union despite the fact that a majority of employees had submitted a petition expressing their desire to remain union free in advance of the union’s recognition by their employer as their “exclusive bargaining representative.” Cequent officials had implemented a “neutrality agreement” with the USWA union that severely limited employee freedoms. The NLRB’s ultimate decision will impact the enforceability of controversial “neutrality agreements,” contracts between unions and employers under which the employer agrees to actively assist organizers in unionizing its workers.

Fresno, Calif. (June 27, 2005) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against a local Fresno casino for stifling the free speech of workers opposing unionization. James Terrazas’ charges, filed in recent days for similarly situated employees, come in the midst of an employee-initiated decertification campaign to strip the Unite-Here union of its monopoly bargaining privileges at Chukchansi Gold Resort and Casino (Chukchansi Gold). The charges point out that the employer established several work rules in violation of federal labor law. Additionally, casino management enforced some of these rules discriminatorily—targeting only those employees favoring decertification of the union. “Chukchansi Gold is doing the bidding of the Unite-Here union hierarchy by stifling employee dissent,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Employees should be allowed to exercise their freedom of speech—whether or not the union brass like what they hear.” Chukchansi Gold originally recognized the Unite-Here union as the monopoly bargaining agent of 700-800 employees in November of 2004, as the result of a controversial “card-check” system in which union organizers bypass the less-abusive secret ballot election process and instead browbeat and mislead workers into signing cards that are counted as “votes” for unionization. This coercive “card-check” campaign arose from legally suspect gaming compacts Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law last August. The compacts included a requirement forcing the affected casinos to enter into so-called “neutrality agreements” with local union officials. Under these coercive “neutrality agreements” union organizers are given full access to company facilities and employees’ personal information (including home addresses) as they seek signatures on union authorization cards. In a related action, Foundation attorneys have asked the Department of Interior not to approve the California gaming compacts because they unlawfully deny employers their right to ensure that employees get a secret ballot election when choosing whether to unionize. The Regional Director of the NLRB will now investigate Terrazas’ charges, and determine whether to issue a formal complaint.