Union Officials Forced to Agree to New Decertification Election after Workers Complained of Union Intimidation

California workers faced union threats, intimidation in an earlier bid to eject unwanted union from the workplace

Banning, California (July 11, 2008) – In response to objections filed by workers represented by the National Right to Work Foundation alleging union misconduct during a recent decertification election at Coastline Manufacturing, International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades Local 636 union officials decided to save face rather than go through an embarrassing National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) hearing. Instead, they agreed to a new election to determine whether the union will retain its monopoly bargaining privileges.

After union officials unlawfully tampered with employees’ efforts to prove a majority didn’t want union representation, workers contacted the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal assistance. Employees at the glass manufacturing company then sought a union decertification election supervised by the NLRB to formally toss the International Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades local out of their workplace.

On May 19, a majority of workers voted to retain union representation, but the results were marred by union threats, intimidation, and other irregularities. Foundation staff attorneys filed official objections with the NLRB’s Regional Director, citing five union violations of federal labor election guidelines and asking for a new decertification election so that employees could freely express their preferences.

Workers reported that the union illegally tainted the election by installing a union official as a supposedly “neutral” election observer, threatening employees with financial penalties and employer confiscation of pension funds in the event of decertification, menacing workers with suggestions of lay-offs if the union were to be ejected, and threatening employees with disclosure of family members’ immigration status.

The NLRB Regional Director granted a hearing to resolve employees’ objections, but union officials apparently recognized the likelihood of an embarrassing loss and, at the 11th hour, decided to withdraw from the proceedings and instead agree to another federally-supervised decertification election.

“Union officials’ willingness to intimidate the very employees they are supposed to represent irreparably compromised the integrity of the decertification election,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The union’s decision not to contest the workers’ charges clearly demonstrates the process was fatally flawed. We can only hope that this next election will fairly reflect employees’ preferences.”

Right to Work Attorneys Intervene to Stop NLRB General Counsel from Blocking Union’s Ejection from Narricot Industries

Case highlights legal bias that pushes employees into union ranks and entrenches union despite employee opposition

Norfolk, Virginia (June 6, 2008) – With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, employees at fabric manufacturer Narricot Industries have filed a motion to defend their decision to throw the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners Union Local 2316 out of their workplace. After workers overwhelmingly supported decertification, union officials moved to block the employees’ wishes.

Prior to filing a decertification petition, only one quarter of employees in the collective bargaining unit were dues-paying members of the unpopular union, the majority having exercised their rights under Virginia’s Right to Work law to opt out of union dues.  And 64 percent of employees signed a petition to remove the union as their collective bargaining agent.

In an effort to undo the employees’ decision, Carpenters union lawyers filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).  Under federal labor law, Carpenters union officials would have to prove that any unfair labor practices committed by the employer incited employees to support decertification. Because employee discontent with union representation predates union officials’ accusations against Narricot, the Carpenters union’s attempt to nullify the decertification petition is unlikely to succeed.

Unfortunately, the NLRB General Counsel moved for a court order that forces employees back into the union for as long as the union’s charge is under consideration. If such an injunction is granted, the Carpenters union will regain its monopoly control of workplace representation until the Board rules upon the validity of the unfair labor practice charges, regardless of the employees’ desires to be free of union representation.

To stop workers from being forced back into union ranks, employees represented by Foundation attorneys filed a motion to participate in the injunction hearing. Foundation attorneys contend that employees freely chose to leave the union, and that it would be unfair to force them back into the union against their will.

“It is abundantly clear that the company’s actions had nothing to do with widespread employee dissatisfaction with the union,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The NLRB should respect workers’ clear desire to remove the union.”

KV Pharmaceutical Employees Vote To Oust Unwanted Teamsters Union from Workplace

After Teamsters union lawyers stonewalled ballot counting for months, NLRB announced that employees voted out unwanted union

St. Louis, MO (January 23, 2008) – Overcoming months of union stonewalling, federal officials today announced KV Pharmaceutical Company (NYSE:KV-A) employees have voted 89-46 to remove an unpopular Teamsters union local from their workplace.

Teamsters Local 688 has been booted as the employees’ “exclusive bargaining representative” and may no longer act as a middleman between the employees and management. The employees received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation in overcoming months of delays at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and legal challenges by Teamsters union lawyers who tried to stonewall the results of the vote.

Calbert Edwards and his KV Pharma coworkers obtained the secret ballot “decertification” vote after gaining signatures from an overwhelming majority of employees at the pharmaceutical giant. However, after the election was held in November, the NLRB Regional Director indefinitely impounded the ballots, leaving the employees without their election results.

Teamsters Local 688 lawyers had delayed the counting of ballots by filing “blocking charges” at the NLRB. They alleged that the company tried to entice the employees to vote against the Teamsters union by promising better benefits if the Teamsters union was voted out.

But, with help from attorneys at the National Right to Work Foundation, Edwards and his coworkers petitioned the NLRB to proceed. Consequently, in early January the NLRB Regional Director granted the request – dismissing the Teamsters union’s charges – and ordered the ballots counted. As a result of the employees’ decertification victory, KV Pharma workers will now be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment, and be rewarded on their individual merit.

“Teamsters lawyers threw up every stumbling block possible over the past several months to block KV Pharma 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 Missouri 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 an uphill battle for workers to obtain or win. In particular, union lawyers are adept at gumming up the works by filing baseless charges that often block an election for years. Employees can also only obtain such elections during narrowly prescribed periods every few years, and incumbent union hierarchies often retaliate against dissenting employees.

Laidlaw Transit Busing Employees Vote to Kick Out A Union that Won’t Go Away

**Batavia, IL (December 20, 2007)** – Laidlaw Transit, Inc. busing employees have voted to remove Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1028 as the “exclusive bargaining representative” of approximately 160 transit workers. In an election held earlier this week, Laidlaw Transit employees voted 83-64 to oust the unwanted union from their workplace.

The election result comes just months after a majority of employees had already petitioned their employer to withdraw recognition of the ATU union. However, after a British company, FirstGroup PLC, completed the purchase of Laidlaw Transit in October, the bus company and ATU Local 1028 officials illegally began bargaining over the wages and working conditions of employees that the union did not even “represent.”

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, Laidlaw Transit employee Russell Haasch filed federal charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Haasch highlighted that ATU union officials had been negotiating a contract with FirstGroup, despite the fact that he and his coworkers had successfully ousted the union earlier this year.

In spring 2007, Haasch collected signatures from an overwhelming majority of his coworkers 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. Haasch and his coworkers soon realized that the successor employer, FirstGroup, was negotiating a contract with ATU officials, despite the fact that the employees had 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 FirstGroup engaged in illegal “pre-recognition” bargaining. As part of their negotiations, the union sought a forced-dues clause in the contract that would make payment of union dues a job requirement. Facing an embarrassing federal prosecution, officials of ATU Local 1028 and FirstGroup had no choice but to agree to the secret ballot decertification election.

“Despite ATU union officials’ attempt to force this unpopular union on employees’ like-it-or-not, Haasch and his coworkers have once again shown them the door,” 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 no surprise that workers have repeatedly rejected this union hierarchy.”

As a result of the decertification victory, Laidlaw Transit employees will now be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment, and be rewarded on their individual merit. Decertification elections are an uphill battle for workers to obtain or win. In particular, union lawyers are adept at gumming up the works by filing baseless charges that often block an election for years. Employees can only obtain such elections during narrow periods every few years, and incumbent union hierarchies often retaliate against dissenting employees.

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

Federal Board to Prosecute Butte-Based Union for Illegal Threats and Dues Seizures at Local Safeway

**Butte, MT (August 6, 2007)** – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has agreed to prosecute the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 4 union for illegally seizing forced union dues from multiple Safeway employees’ paychecks, unlawfully threatening termination, and rejecting requests to resign from formal union membership.

With help from attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Safeway Inc. (NYSE: SWY) employees Gerald Rasmussen and Carla Crandall originally filed federal charges against the UFCW Local 4 union in April and May, respectively. After an initial investigation, the NLRB combined the complaints into one case and scheduled a hearing for September 2007 to prosecute the union.

The employees’ original charges cite that UFCW Local 4 union officials are attempting to enforce a compulsory unionism clause requiring employees to join or pay dues to the union or be fired from their jobs, despite a formal employee election recently stripping the union bosses of their forced unionism privileges.

All 34 Safeway employees participated in the late April NLRB-supervised deauthorization vote – a secret ballot election that gives employees the right to eliminate the mandatory dues clause from a monopoly bargaining contract. UFCW Local 4 union officials have been challenging the election result.

“No one should be forced to pay dues to a union,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “These sorts of abuses will continue to plague workers in states like Montana, where there is no Right to Work law to ensure that payment of union dues is strictly voluntary.”

After learning of their right to resign from formal union membership from sources independent of UFCW Local 4, Rasmussen, Crandall and other employees sent letters to union officials resigning from formal union membership. Union officials rejected their requests and never provided any of the legally-mandated financial disclosure statements to the Safeway employees.

Additionally, UFCW union officials invented their own bogus and illegal rules for resigning. In their correspondence, union officials claim the grocery employees’ letters were unacceptable because they were not notarized, the letters were not sent by certified mail in separate envelopes, and were not accompanied by copies of applicable NLRB decisions and Supreme Court rulings.

However, under the 1988 Foundation-won Supreme Court decision in *Communications Workers v. Beck*, union officials cannot require formal union membership or the payment of union dues unrelated to collective bargaining as a condition of employment. The decision also requires union officials to provide employees with verified financial disclosure of union expenditures, so that employees can cut off the seizure of forced union dues used for activities such as union politicking or lobbying.

Download the NLRB Complaint

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