Over 300 Treasure Island Foods Employees Finally Allowed a Vote on Ousting Unpopular Union

**Chicago, IL (May 30, 2007)** – After multiple attempts by United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) Locals 881 and 1546 lawyers to block a decertification election, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 13 ruled that over 300 employees of Treasure Island Foods, Inc. at six local stores have a right to vote on whether to oust the unwanted union.

Treasure Island employees originally filed for a union decertification election in 2004, after UFCW officials ordered an unpopular boycott and fell out of favor with the vast majority of employees. Even though the employees’ petition was timely filed, UFCW Local 881 and 1546 officials thwarted it by filing a series of “blocking charges” at the NLRB against Treasure Island Foods for allegedly encouraging employee dissatisfaction with the union.

In 2005, after obtaining signatures from an overwhelming majority of employees at the grocery chain, Dan Schalin and his coworkers filed another decertification election petition at the NLRB. Threatened by the independent-minded employees’ petition, UFCW union officials continued to file multiple unfair labor practice charges against Treasure Island to block the election. UFCW union officials alleged that Treasure Island illegally sent letters to its employees encouraging them to file the petition, but an administrative law judge rejected that claim.

Finally, with help from attorneys at the National Right to Work Foundation, Schalin and his coworkers requested that the petition for decertification be reinstated. Late last week, the NLRB Regional Director ruled in favor of their request, stating that Treasure Islands’ written letters never tainted the employees’ showing of interest in the petition.

“UFCW officials have thrown up every stumbling block possible over three years to block Treasure Island employees from exercising their free choice,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The hostility of the union hierarchy to workers’ interests shows why Illinois needs a Right to Work law that would make union affiliation and dues payment strictly voluntary.”

A decertification election, an NLRB-supervised secret ballot election to oust a union, is generally an uphill battle for workers to obtain, particularly because union lawyers are adept at gumming up the works by filing baseless charges that often block an election for years. Under the National Labor Relations Act, a decertification election gives employees the opportunity to cast a vote to remove the union as the “exclusive bargaining representative” in a workplace, but one can only be sought during narrowly proscribed periods every few years. If the Treasure Island employees vote to revoke the unwanted UFCW union’s “certification,” employees at all six stores in the Chicago area will become nonunion and free to negotiate over their own wages and working conditions.

Download the Employee's Request for Review

Download the NLRB's Order Reinstating the Decertification Petition

Over 900 SFO Airport Security Screeners to Vote Whether to Eliminate Compulsory Union Dues from Workplace

**San Francisco, CA (May 14, 2007)** — With help from the National Right to Work Foundation, over 900 airport security screeners at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) have successfully petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a deauthorization election to stop Service Employees International Union (SEIU) officials from forcing employees to pay union dues as a job condition.

Led by Stephen Burke, a four and a half year employee of Covenant Airport Security at SFO, the workers are upset that SEIU officials became their monopoly bargaining agent -- without a secret-ballot election but rather through a coercive “card check” campaign -- and almost immediately ordered the security screeners to pay union dues within 30 days or be fired from their jobs.

Hundreds of SFO security screeners apparently object to the mandatory union dues requirement. Over 45 percent of Burke’s coworkers signed the deauthorization petition, far beyond the 30 percent necessary to trigger the NLRB supervised-election.

"Without the ability to withhold union dues, SFO screeners have virtually no leverage to keep union officials from continuing to act in their own self interest,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation, a charitable organization that is assisting the screeners in vindicating their rights.

If a majority of all employees in the bargaining unit vote in favor of deauthorization, union officials will be stripped of their special privilege to compel payment of compulsory dues. The requirement for an absolute majority, set by the National Labor Relations Act, is more difficult for employees to achieve than the standard for certifying a union, which requires only a majority of those voting.

SEIU officials had previously tried to block the employees from obtaining the deauthorization election by challenging signatures collected in opposition to the forced dues clause before it took effect. However, the NLRB in Washington, DC, recently rejected that challenge and ordered the election to proceed.

The election will take place by mail, with the NLRB sending out ballots on June 4, and the results being tallied on June 19. However, even if the deauthorization election succeeds, union officials will still be able to bar the screeners – even those that are not union members – from negotiating over their individual wages and working conditions.

Download the NLRB Order

Federal Labor Board to Prosecute UAW Union for Bullying Nurses Seeking to Vote Out Unwanted Union

**Toledo, OH (February 6, 2007)** – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued a formal complaint and agreed to prosecute the United Auto Workers (UAW) union for a campaign of harassment and intimidation aimed at nurses seeking an election to vote the union out at St. Vincent Mercy Medical Center.

The complaint stems from unfair labor practice charges filed by St. Vincent nurse Amy Anderson in July 2006 with help from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys. Anderson’s charges detailed a bullying campaign by UAW union officials as she and others sought to collect signatures from their co-workers to throw the unwanted union out of their workplace.

The NLRB complaint against the UAW union and its Local 12 lists numerous examples of union agents physically intimidating nurses, including “following, surrounding, and impeding access to employees.” The complaint also cites that in one instance a union official physically “struck a clipboard containing the petition” from one of the nurse’s hands.

The NLRB complaint also alleges that UAW officials unlawfully intimidated nurses by such acts as recording their license plate numbers. The related harassment took place at and around the medical center, not only in the parking lots, but even in the cafeteria and bathrooms.

“UAW union officials have unleashed a shameless bullying campaign on St. Vincent nurses to keep the mandatory dues flowing in,” 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.”

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

Tired of union officials’ mistreatment, a group of nurses formed “Nurses For A Union-Free St. Vincent’s” (www.NursesKnowTheTruth.bravehost.com) with the goal of decertifying the unwanted automotive union. The NLRB has scheduled an April 24, 2007, hearing before an administrative law judge to prosecute the UAW union.

In April 2006, Foundation attorneys helped four nurses from St. Vincent’s file related federal charges with the NLRB against the UAW union and its Toledo Local 12 for violating their rights under the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision *Communications Workers v. Beck*. Under *Beck* and related rulings, union officials must inform workers of their right to refrain from formal union membership and from paying for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities.

Download the Complaint

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.