Employee Rights Group Opposes Federal Bureaucracy’s Devious Proposal to Legitimize Abusive Union Organizing Campaigns

Proposed NLRB rules contradict current statutes and would effectively “rent out” the federal agency to rubber stamp coercive unionization drives

Washington, DC (March 28, 2008) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed its opposition to a package of sweeping rule changes proposed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) bureaucracy that would further undermine the right of American workers to choose freely whether to form a union. The Foundation filed its comments on behalf of itself and three employees victimized by coercive “card check” unionization drives in California, Ohio, and South Carolina, respectively.

Under the proposed rules, colluding union officials and company officials could trigger a quick-snap union certification election even when no employees have expressed any interest in unionization. The proposed changes would toss aside traditional NLRB certification safeguards while effectively barring employees from challenging any misconduct or unfair labor practices.

Additionally, an NLRB rubberstamp could be obtained despite strategic gerrymandering of bargaining units and even where no advance notice of the election is provided to employees.

The proposed NLRB rules also appear to contradict the National Labor Relations Act by unilaterally shortening the statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges from six months to seven days. The proposed rules would also unlawfully leave employee allegations of misconduct to the unappealable discretion of NLRB Regional Directors, cutting the Board and appellate courts out of the process.

“The NLRB’s devious proposal would ‘rent out’ federal oversight of representation elections to union officials and certain employers who have caved in to extortionate pressure campaigns intended to induce them to hand over their employees to forced unionism,” stated Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The NLRB should not further erode employees’ freedom to resist unwanted unionization, nor should it so crassly provide a veneer of legitimacy to coercive and often illegal union organizing tactics.”

The Foundation’s comments cite that the proposed changes would rapidly accelerate a trend of coercive “top down” union organizing drives. Such drives often include “corporate campaigns” where a non-union company is targeted with ugly PR onslaughts, trumped up lawsuits, and political pressure.

“In short, the proposed rules must be viewed in the context of union efforts to destroy both the full and open debate inherent in… the NLRA-established secret ballot election process, and replace them with “neutrality agreements,” forced employer silence, non-existent election campaigns, employees’ inability to object or organize a movement to oppose unionization, and union selection via either “card check” or rapid-fire consent elections,” wrote Foundation staff attorneys Glenn Taubman and Bill Messenger.

Worker Advocate Praises U.S. Supreme Court Review of Ninth Circuit Ruling Endorsing Coercive Union Organizing

**Springfield, VA (November 20, 2007)** – Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, made the following statement in response to today’s granting of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Foundation-supported Chamber v. Brown appeal.

An en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit had reversed two of its earlier appellate rulings by a vote of 8-3, upholding a state law that will effectively force coercive union organizing upon employees of private companies who receive state funds. Foundation attorneys filed an amicus curiae (“friend of the court” brief) urging U.S. Supreme Court review.

“In a controversial decision with national implications, the activist Ninth Circuit in Chamber v. Brown upheld a California law which increases pressure on employees to join potentially unwanted unions.

“This special-interest state statute is pre-empted by federal labor law, which is supposed to protect employees from pressure to unionize by union officials and other entities. We’re thankful the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case.

“The practical effect is that employees of private employers wishing to accept funds from the state are denied truthful information regarding the downsides of unionization. Their employers could ultimately be blackballed from government contracts unless they clear the path for union organizers to recruit new forced-dues-paying union members. Moreover, union organizers will insist that the state law entitles them to sweeping access to company facilities, employees’ private personal information, and the power to sidestep the less-abusive secret ballot election process for determining whether employees actually want a union.

“California officials are using the heavy hand of government to trample upon workers’ rights. Because union hierarchies seem to be having difficulties persuading employees to join unions voluntarily, they have resorted to coercive tactics in order to maintain the flow of forced union dues.

“The National Right to Work Foundation denounces this rogue appellate ruling and applauds the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to review it.”

Transit Union Slapped With Federal Labor Charges for Muscling Back into a Facility After Employees’ Revolt Forced it Out

**Batavia, IL (November 2, 2007)** – The bus company First Group, Inc. and the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1028 have been hit with federal labor board charges for illegally bargaining over employees who the union does not even represent. First Group employee Russell Haasch filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) earlier this week with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys.

As Haasch details in his charges, ATU union officials have been negotiating a contract with First Group, despite the fact that Haasch and his coworkers had successfully ousted the union earlier this year. According to First Group’s website, on October 1 the UK-based transit company completed the purchase of Haasch’s employer, Laidlaw Transit.

In Spring 2007, Haasch collected signatures from an overwhelming majority of his co-workers and in June presented the petition to their employer Laidlaw Transit, which legally and properly ended its recognition of the ATU union as the monopoly bargaining agent for the approximately 160 employees. Only recently did Haasch and his co-workers realize that their new employer, First Group, was negotiating a contract with ATU officials, despite the fact that the employees had successfully shown that the union did not have their support.

According to the National Labor Relations Act, by bargaining over the contracts of employees that the union does not legally represent, the union and First Group are engaging in illegal “pre-recognition” bargaining. As part of their negotiations, the union is once again seeking a forced-dues clause in the contract that makes payment of union dues a job requirement. Indeed, union officials have been given access to First Group facilities and are now demanding that employees pay union dues or be fired.

“Union officials and First Group management are illegally attempting to force this unpopular union down employees’ throats,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “With the lack of respect these union officials have for the employees, it is not surprising that workers rejected the union last June.”

The unfair labor practice charges ask the NLRB to seek an injunction to immediately stop First Group from continuing to negotiate a contract with the rogue ATU union and to cease all demands for union dues. The NLRB Regional Director will now investigate the charges and decide whether to prosecute the charges and seek injunctive relief.

National Right to Work Secures New Rights for Employees to Protect Against Abusive Union “Card Check” Organizing

**Washington, D.C. (October 2, 2007)** – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) voted 3-2 to overturn its policy of denying employees any access to a secret ballot vote over unionization after a union is recognized pursuant to the controversial “card check” organizing process.

The long-awaited ruling came in two high-profile cases brought by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys for employees at two automotive suppliers (Dana and Metaldyne) who found themselves organized by the United Auto Workers (UAW) union. In the future, the federal agency will give employees notice that they have 45 days after the recognition to file a decertification petition to obtain an election to vote out the unwanted union.

However, in a bizarre move that punishes the very employees who brought these cases, the NLRB majority decreed that its ruling would only apply prospectively. As a result, the forcibly unionized Dana and Metaldyne employees – as well as employees of other employers who had similarly filed decertification petitions after card-check campaigns – will not be allowed to toss out the unions imposed upon them.

The NLRB’s decision prospectively impacts the effect of so-called “neutrality” agreements, contracts between a union and an employer under which the employer agrees not to oppose unionization of its workers. Under these coercive agreements, employers typically also grant union operatives sweeping access to their workplaces, home addresses, and employees' other personal information. These pacts also strip workers of the opportunity to a secret ballot election and often allow union officials to hold mandatory “captive audience” meetings to browbeat the employees to sign union cards that are counted as “votes” for unionization.

The NLRB majority pointed out, “card checks are less reliable because they lack secrecy and procedural safeguards… union card-solicitation campaigns have been accompanied by misinformation… workers sometimes sign union authorization cards…to get the person off their back.”

The NLRB ruling comes in the consolidated cases of employees at Dana Corporation in Upper Sandusky, Ohio, and Metaldyne in St. Marys, Pennsylvania, who filed decertification petitions (with 35 percent and more than 50 percent of employees signing, respectively) seeking elections to decide whether officials of the nation’s largest auto workers union truly enjoyed the support of a majority of employees and could lawfully act as their “exclusive representatives.” The employees filed these petitions after their employers had announced that they would recognize the union on the basis of signed cards. The NLRB Regional Directors dismissed the election petitions, and the employees appealed to the NLRB in Washington, D.C., in 2004.

“This is an encouraging step forward for employee freedom, but the Bush NLRB has been sitting on many other important employee rights cases for several years,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Meanwhile, there is no moral or legal justification for penalizing the very employees who brought these cases by barring them from throwing out these illegally imposed unions.”

Download the NLRB Decision

Court Permission Sought to Alert More Than 12,000 Workers that Union Organizers Illegally Obtained Personal DMV Records

**Philadelphia, Pa. (September 19, 2007)** – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation today filed a motion in federal court seeking to inform more than an estimated 12,000 individuals that union organizers have surreptitiously violated their privacy rights under federal law.

The Foundation filed the motion to intervene in *Pichler v. UNITE* in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after the court ordered the union to pay damages because union organizers unlawfully used the license plate numbers of over 1,500 Cintas Corporation employees to access their personal information in official Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) records. Union operatives conducted an additional 12,100 searches on individuals who may be employees of other non-union companies targeted by the union. Those individuals are unaware of this illegal invasion of their privacy.

The *Pichler* lawsuit, currently on appeal by union lawyers at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, revealed that UNITE union organizers violated employee rights under the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) of 1994. That federal law bars anyone from using motor vehicle records to obtain individuals’ personal information with limited exceptions. The union must potentially pay $2,500 per violation if the District Court’s decision is affirmed.

Union organizers illegally obtained the home addresses of Cintas employees for the purpose of conducting “home visits” to pressure and browbeat those workers into signing union authorization cards. The union intended to use these cards to bypass the secret-ballot election process for determining whether the employees wanted to unionize.

The U.S. District Court determined that union operatives conducted surveillance of numerous parking lots used by workers, collected license plate numbers, and conducted more than 13,700 searches of driving records. Cintas employees were alarmed to learn of this invasion of their privacy and filed their successful class-action lawsuit against the notoriously abusive union.

The Foundation’s motion seeks to modify a protective order in the case, which paradoxically prevents any of these other 12,100 Americans from being notified about the violation of their rights. The Foundation is seeking the right to do a one-time mailing under court supervision to each citizen the union operatives targeted. Ultimately, those 12,100 victims could be entitled to over $30 million in liquidated damages from the UNITE union.

“Thousands of employees deserve to know that UNITE union organizers may have violated their privacy by rifling through their DMV records,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “Citizens should not be prevented from learning that union operatives are secretly using their private personal information.”

Download the motion

Island View Casino Employees Seek Federal Injunction to Block Coercive “Card Check” Unionization Drive

**Gulfport, MS (August 14, 2007)** – Three employees of the Island View Casino have filed a lawsuit in federal court to stop union organizers from obtaining confidential information about Island View employees and from demanding other organizing assistance from Island View management in violation of federal labor law.

In the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi with the help of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, the three employees, detail how Teamsters, International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) and UNITE-HERE union officials are attempting to violate the Labor Management Relations Act by demanding that Island View hand over “things of value” to union organizers. Among these, Teamsters, IUOE, and UNITE union organizers have demanded confidential records containing personal information about employees, sweeping physical access to Gulfside’s properties for organizing, and control over all communications Gulfside has with its employees concerning the unions.

The federal law provisions at issue are meant to prevent sweetheart deals between employers and unions which induce union officials to sell out the interests of the employees they are supposed to represent.

The unions’ demands are part of a “Memorandum of Agreement” that union officials signed with the management of the Grand Casino Gulfport. The remaining assets of the now-defunct Grand Casino were purchased by the Gulfside Casino Partnership in December 2005 after the Grand Casino was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

So-called “neutrality and card check” agreements give union organizers sweeping power to browbeat rank-and-file workers into union ranks. Armed with confidential personnel information, union organizers often make “house calls” where they can intimidate or harass employees into signing cards that are then counted as “votes” for unionization. “Card checks” also deny employees the privacy and limited protections afforded workers during a National Labor Relations Board-run secret ballot election over whether to unionize.

In past National Right to Work Foundation-assisted cases, employees have reported being misled about the cards’ true purpose, and some employees have even had to threaten police action to get union organizers off their property. The Island View employees and their co-workers are particularly concerned about the prospect of home visits from union organizers, after hearing stories of intimidation during organizing drives at other area casinos.

“Union bosses are determined to force unionization on Island View employees from the top down, like it or not,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “These employees believe that the union bosses are more concerned with bolstering union ranks than with representing rank-and-file employees.”

Mississippi is one of 22 Right to Work states in which union membership and dues payment is strictly voluntary. However, if union officials are granted monopoly bargaining power over Island View employees, the workers will no longer be free to negotiate individually over their own wages and working conditions.

Download the Federal Lawsuit

Foundation Forces Union Officials to Abandon Their Illegal Scheme to Coerce Engineers into Union Ranks

**Aberdeen, MD (August 8, 2007)** – Following challenges by employees unlawfully unionized by “card check,” International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers (IAM) union Local 2424 officials backed down and settled federal labor charges pending against them.

The settlement came after federal investigators found that union officials had violated the employees’ rights during a so-called card check organizing drive which bypassed the secret-ballot election process.

Last month, three employees working for private contractors at the Aberdeen Test Center military facility obtained free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation. Foundation attorneys filed charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 5 office in Baltimore. The NLRB charges detailed multiple union violations of the employees’ rights, including unionizing employees who did not support the union, unlawfully transferring these employees into a union bargaining unit, and threatening employees with termination if they did not join the union.

To avoid an embarrassing NLRB prosecution, IAM officials formally settled the charges by renouncing monopoly bargaining privileges over the more than 150 employees who were unlawfully unionized. The union brass also agreed that they would not attempt to unionize the engineers under a card check scheme, but instead would only use the less coercive NLRB-supervised secret-ballot election process.

“IAM union bosses got caught red-handed violating the rights of the very employees they claimed to represent,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “While this case highlights the coercion inherent in so-called ‘card check’ unionization, ultimately these abuses by union bosses will not end until their compulsory unionism privileges are eliminated.”

The case is one of many documented instances of fraud and abuse in card check organizing drives. Under card check, union-controlled authorization cards are used as “votes” for unionization. Employees report that cards are often collected under false-premises or through intimidation. In this case, the union declared a victory in their card check drive when it did not even have cards from a majority of employees.

The employees also filed charges against their employers (Jacobs Technology Inc., LogSec. Corporation and Science and Technology Corporation) for their role in imposing the unwanted union on the workers by recognizing IAM officials as the employees’ collective bargaining representative without proof that the union had the support of a majority of the employees.

Staunch Employee Opposition Forces Union out of Multiple Kaiser Permanente Facilities Across Southern California

**Los Angeles, CA (July 9, 2007)** – A group of four Kaiser Permanente employees have forced the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers (SEIU-UHW) union to abandon multiple Kaiser Permanente units across the Southern California area after use of coercive union organizing methods. The action comes in the wake of unfair labor practice charges the employees filed just weeks earlier on June 21, and it will impact up to 400 Kaiser Permanente employees throughout the area.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys helped Lisa Eklund and three of her co-workers file the federal charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the SEIU-UHW union and Kaiser. The charges alleged that union officials deceived Kaiser employees into signing union “authorization” cards that would later be counted as “votes” favoring unionization. Union officials also falsely told employees that signing the card was merely a request for more information about unionizing and promised higher pay raises and benefits. Lastly, SEIU-UHW officials engaged in unlawful bargaining over the employees’ wages and working conditions before the employees had even selected union officials as their representatives.

On December 28, 2006, Kaiser management recognized SEIU-UHW on the basis of the “card check” count. However, Eklund’s charge highlights that SEIU-UHW union officials manipulated the size of the bargaining unit and secured signatures from employees who were ineligible to participate in the “card check” organizing drive. Upon the heath care employees’ request to disclose the names of employees who were eligible to participate, union officials were unable to indicate which employees were inside or outside of the alleged bargaining unit.

Within two weeks of filing the federal charges, the NLRB indicated its intention to formally investigate the apparently unlawful “card check” organizing scheme. Upon the NLRB Region 21’s initial investigation, SEIU-UHW union officials and Kaiser rapidly abandoned the “card check” count.

“SEIU officials have been repeatedly caught red handed running roughshod over employee rights during these coercive organizing drives,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “These campaigns give employees two basic choices- union ‘yes,’ or union ‘yes.’”

“Card check” union organizing strips workers of the limited protections of a government-supervised secret ballot election in deciding whether or not to unionize. Instead, union agents frequently mislead or badger workers one-on-one into signing cards that are then counted as “votes” favoring unionization.

Only months earlier National Right to Work Foundation attorneys forced SEIU Local 49 to abandon the coercive “card check” union organizing process in Oregon and Washington for six months because of repeated and widespread abuses.

Statement on Congressman Andrews' Interference in Trump Plaza Hotel Union Election

**Atlantic City, NJ (March 30, 2007)** - Justin Hakes, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation issued the following statement regarding recent developments in the NLRB charge filed this morning against the UAW for illegal tampering with the scheduled NLRB election at the Trump Plaza Casino:

"The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has confirmed it is opening an investigation into whether the UAW union committed unfair labor practices in enlisting Congressman Andrews to interfere in tomorrow's NLRB election by holding the sham certification ceremony. This particular NLRB regional office takes the position that it will not block the election or the impound ballots unless the employer or union themselves ask it to do so.

"However, the unfair labor practice investigation called for by the National Right to Work Foundation will move forward. Assuming the agency agrees that the union's and Andrews' actions coerced the employees, Right to Work attorneys will seek a remedy that includes voiding any illicit union status as bargaining agent, as it has done successfully in other cases throughout the country.

"Additionally, if any Trump Plaza dealers seek free legal assistance from the Foundation, our staff attorneys also stand ready to file post-election objections to prevent the tainted election from resulting in improper certification of the union in the first place."

Union-Abused Employees Give Testimony to Congress Against Coercive “Card Check” Organizing Scheme

Washington, DC (February 8, 2007) – Two employees represented by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys in defending against abusive “card check” union organizing tactics today gave written testimony to the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee about their disturbing experiences.

The coercive card check unionization scheme is highly controversial for severely curtailing employees’ freedom to choose whether or not to unionize and for stripping workers of the limited protections of a government-supervised secret ballot election.

Mike Ivey, a Foundation-assisted materials handler at Freightliner Custom Chassis Corporation in Gaffney, South Carolina, detailed the unrelenting harassment he and his coworkers have faced over the past four years at the hands of United Auto Workers (UAW) union organizers seeking to force unwanted unionization upon them. This has occurred even though more than 70 percent of the employees submitted a petition stating they want nothing to do with the UAW.

“Faced with a never-ending onslaught, we employees feel that the UAW is holding our heads under water until we drown,” he stated. “Some employees have had five or more harassing visits from these union organizers. The only way, it seems, to stop the badgering and pressure is to sign the card….Moreover, in many instances, employees who signed cards under pressure or false pretenses later attempted to retrieve or void this card. The union would not allow this to happen, telling them that they could not do so.”

Karen Mayhew, a Portland, Oregon, employee of Kaiser Foundation Health Plan (a component of the national Kaiser Permanente health network) also detailed misrepresentations made to employees during a card check campaign last year involving the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Aside from collecting the cards under false pretenses – that they would actually be used to get a secret ballot election – union organizers browbeat people to sign. Ultimately, the federal labor board forced the union to rescind its unlawful “voluntary recognition.”

“Throughout this whole ordeal, my colleagues and I were subjected to badgering and immense peer pressure. Some of us even received calls at home,” Mayhew stated. “I believe this abuse was directed towards me at the request of the union in an effort to intimidate me and have me back down… union abuses of a wide variety are the rule in ‘card check’ campaigns, not the exception.”

Karen Mayhew’s testimony can be found at www.nrtw.org/pdfs/Mayhew.pdf. Mike Ivey’s testimony can be found at www.nrtw.org/pdfs/Ivey.pdf.