Hundreds of Nurses at Henry Ford Genesys Hospital File Petition Demanding Election to Oust Teamsters
Nearly 70% of currently working nurses sign petition asking for decertification vote
Grand Blanc, MI (October 6, 2026) – Hundreds of registered nurses at Henry Ford Genesys Hospital backed a petition filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking a vote to remove Teamsters Local 332 officials from their hospital. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law, a task that includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions.
Genesys Hospital nurse Kristen Cox, who is spearheading the nurses’ effort, submitted a “decertification” petition with the NLRB, with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, backed by the signatures of 264 nurses, which amounts to nearly 70% of the 385 nurses currently working at the hospital.
Teamsters Local 332 officials launched a strike at Genesys Hospital on Labor Day 2025, and more than a year later, the strike remains unresolved. What is certain, however, is that the overwhelming number of nurses working at the hospital no longer want to be represented by Teamsters Local 332.
Disregarding the voices of nurses who simply seek the ability to choose their representative, the Teamsters are blocking any decertification election at the hospital. This tactic, known as a “blocking charge,” allows union officials to halt workers’ decertification efforts by filing unproven charges against their employer. In June, Foundation staff attorneys filed a formal rulemaking petition asking the NLRB to scrap the non-statutory policies it uses to block workers’ decertification votes.
Foundation staff attorneys also represent Genesys nurses who have filed unfair labor practice charges against Teamsters Local 332 for retaliating against nurses who resigned their union membership and returned to work. In those cases, Teamsters officials stopped payment on checks they issued to employees who exercised their legal right to resign from the union and return to work in defiance of the union strike.
Michigan politicians repealed the state’s Right to Work law in 2023, meaning private sector workers in the state can once again be forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs.
“Genesys nurses have made clear that they want the chance to vote Teamsters bosses out of their hospital. The NLRB should not rubber-stamp union lawyers’ attempts to disenfranchise them,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “If Teamsters bosses are so confident they ‘represent’ what Genesys nurses want, they should stop hiding behind legal maneuvers and respect the wishes of the hundreds of nurses asking for this vote.”
Foundation Notice Offers Free Legal Aid to New York In-Home Medicaid Caregivers Targeted for Forced Unionization by SEIU
Notice: If SEIU gains monopoly control, CDPAP caregivers would be required to pay union dues and comply with other union mandates, just to care for family members
Albany, NY (September 30, 2026) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has released a special legal notice to roughly 190,000 personal assistants who care for people with disabilities through New York’s Medicaid-funded Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program (CDPAP).
The Foundation’s legal notice informs CDPAP personal assistants of their legal rights, which include the right to challenge an effort by Service Employees International Union (SEIU) officials to impose unionization on every assistant currently providing care, often to family members, through the program. The notice encourages caregivers to reach out to the Foundation for additional information about their legal rights and for free legal assistance.
“If certified, SEIU would become the exclusive representative of all personal assistants, irrespective of whether they support the union,” the notice reads. “SEIU would also gain the authority to enter into an agreement requiring that everyone must pay dues or fees to SEIU to act as a personal assistant. If this comes to pass, many personal assistants will have no choice but to give part of their wages to SEIU to continue to provide home-based care, often to their own loved ones.”
The full notice is available here: https://www.nrtw.org/NYCare/
Controversial NY Medicaid Home Care Contract Tied to Secret SEIU Deal, Federal Fraud Lawsuit
On September 22, SEIU officials filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking to gain monopoly control over all caregivers, many of whom provide in-home care for family members. SEIU’s scheme is premised on a secret agreement between SEIU and Public Partnerships, LLC (PPL), under which PPL assists SEIU to obtain a monopoly union “representation” over all personal assistants, after SEIU helped make PPL the sole fiscal intermediary of all CDPAP participants.
The Foundation’s special legal notice highlights that the caregivers, who are often family members or friends of the people they serve, are actually employed by the hundreds of thousands of individual CDPAP participants with disabilities who hire them to work in their homes.
Because of this and the myriad of other legal issues raised by SEIU’s unionization push, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have already filed a motion with the NLRB requesting that it pause the proceedings to allow for amicus briefs, and also so the NLRB can consult with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Justice (DOJ).
In June, DOJ filed a federal lawsuit against PPL, the New York State Department of Health, and the state’s Medicaid director, alleging fraud. In announcing the lawsuit, Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald said, “New York’s backroom deal with PPL has cost taxpayers millions of dollars and cast countless Medicaid patients to the curb.” The announcement also alleged PPL won the contract through “a sham bid process… resulting in a fraud scheme that remains unchecked.”
The Foundation has a long history of defending home care providers from forced unionism. In the Foundation-won 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case Harris v. Quinn, Illinois home care personal assistants, including Pamela Harris, successfully challenged a scheme that forced providers caring for family members with disabilities through Medicaid to pay fees to SEIU officials.
“Personal assistants who care for New Yorkers with disabilities, often their own family members, should not have to hand over part of their wages to SEIU union bosses just to keep providing that care,” National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix said. “This backroom arrangement between SEIU and Public Partnerships is a naked grab for power and dues money at the expense of some of the state’s most vulnerable residents and those who care for them.
“Foundation staff attorneys stand ready to provide free legal aid to any personal assistant who wants to oppose SEIU’s petition and protect their right to refuse union affiliation,” added Mix.
National Right to Work Foundation Asks NLRB to Halt SEIU Scheme to Impose Union on 190,000 New York In-Home Medicaid Caregivers
Motion: Briefing needed as SEIU and PPL work together to impose unionization; PPL facing DOJ fraud lawsuit and isn’t actually caregivers’ ‘employer’
Washington, DC (September 28, 2026) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has filed a motion at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) asking the agency to stay a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) petition seeking to unionize roughly 190,000 personal assistants who care for people with disabilities through New York’s Medicaid-funded Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program.
The Foundation’s motion, filed in Public Partnerships, LLC (NLRB Case No. 03-RC-395461), asks NLRB Region 3 to invite amicus briefs from the Foundation and other interested parties, to consult with the U.S. Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services, and to halt the proceedings until after that briefing and consultation are complete.
The motion argues that Public Partnerships, LLC (PPL), which 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East names as the employer in its petition filed on September 22, is “little more than a payroll processor” for the program. The caregivers, who are often family members or friends of the people they serve, are actually employed by the hundreds of thousands of individual participants with disabilities who hire them to work in their homes. Because of this, the filing notes, the single statewide unit proposed by SEIU is legally inappropriate and “unworkable.”
Motion: NLRB Must Not Rubber-Stamp Collusive Unionization Scheme
The motion observes that the Region won’t get complete briefing on these important issues from the parties because “SEIU and PPL are not adverse to one another, but are working together pursuant to an organizing agreement.” Consultation with federal agencies is also needed, the motion argues, because the U.S. Department of Justice has a pending lawsuit alleging PPL committed fraud to win its contract as the program’s sole fiscal intermediary in New York, and because certifying a union over every provider in a state Medicaid program could conflict with federal Medicaid law.
The motion notes that, especially in light of SEIU officials and the ostensible “employer” PPL working hand in hand to unionize providers, the NLRB must not act as a rubber stamp for the scheme:
“The Region cannot simply accept the parties’ proposals, but must fulfill its statutory duty to make an independent determination as to whether PPL is actually an employer of these personal assistants (it is not) and whether the petitioned-for unit is appropriate (it is not). SEIU and PPL ask the Region to expend considerable resources conducting a mail ballot election of 190,000 individuals.”
Foundation staff attorneys have long defended homecare providers against forced unionism, including winning a U.S. Supreme Court decision in Harris v. Quinn, which held that states cannot force homecare providers to pay union fees.
“Ever since losing Harris v. Quinn at the Supreme Court, SEIU bosses have tried one scheme after another to force Medicaid providers to pay union dues just to care for their own family members in their homes,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “SEIU’s NLRB filing is the latest attempt to siphon mandatory dues out of taxpayer-funded Medicaid programs, and, according to DOJ’s lawsuit, this dubious arrangement is the result of PPL acquiring the contract through a sham bid process rigged by New York State officials.
“The NLRB has a duty to take its time and closely examine the legal implications of this unprecedented scheme to herd 190,000 caregivers into paying forced dues to politically connected SEIU union bosses,” added Mix.
Richmond-Area Penske Workers Latest to Eject Teamsters Following Unanimous Vote to End Teamsters’ So-Called ‘Representation’
Virginia Penske employees join growing movement of rank-and-file workers cutting ties with the Teamsters
Sandston, VA (September 23, 2026) – Employees at Penske Truck Leasing are officially free from the unwanted “representation” of Teamsters Local 592 union officials, after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) certified a vote of Penske workers to “decertify” Teamsters union bosses. The decertification effort was spearheaded by Penske employee Jordan Cutrell, who received free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys during the decertification process.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, a task that includes administering votes to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Cutrell’s petition was signed by an overwhelming majority of his coworkers, triggering the NLRB to administer a secret-ballot election, which took place on September 10 at Penske’s Trampton Road location in Sandston, Virginia, among all full-time and regular part-time technicians and customer service representatives.
Ultimately, the employees voted unanimously 9-0 to terminate Teamsters officials’ power as the workers’ monopoly bargaining “representative.”
Virginia is one of 26 states with a Right to Work law, which safeguards workers by making union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary. However, even in Right to Work states, federal law grants union officials the power to impose their exclusive “representation” on every employee in a work unit, including those who never voted for, joined, or supported the union.
Cutrell and his colleagues are the latest in a growing number of workers who have approached the Foundation to exercise their legal right to remove Teamsters union officials from their workplaces. In just the past few years, Foundation-assisted Penske employees have successfully removed unwanted union bosses from their facilities at several locations across the country, including Dallas, TX, Bloomington, IN, Eagan and Roseville, MN, Nashville, TN, and Swedesboro, NJ.
Just this month, Foundation attorneys also secured a settlement for UPS worker and former Teamsters president Andrew Davis, in his dispute with the Teamsters over union bosses targeting him for informing his coworkers of their legal rights to not be union members and for filing charges against the union with the NLRB. Davis filed his charges after Teamsters officials falsely claimed, in front of his coworkers, that it was a “federal crime” to discuss how to resign their union membership.
“Every day Teamsters bosses give workers new reasons not to want to associate with the union, and we are pleased to have assisted Mr. Cutrell and his coworkers in reclaiming their workplace freedom,” stated National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation attorneys will continue to be a resource for all rank-and-file workers wanting to exercise their legal right to end their affiliation with the Teamsters.”
Ex-Teamsters President Wins Case Against Teamsters’ Retaliation, Union Threats for Filing Federal Charges
Charge: Teamsters threatened UPS employee, claimed it was a “federal crime” to inform others of protected legal right to resign from union membership
Pocatello, ID (September 21, 2026) – Andrew Davis, an employee of United Parcel Service (UPS), has prevailed in his dispute with Teamsters Local 983, after union bosses settled Davis’ National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case against them. An NLRB investigation, initiated by an Unfair Labor Practice charge filed by Davis, found that union officials engaged in illegal threats and retaliation against him after he resigned his union membership and informed coworkers of their legal right to do the same.
Davis, who was president of Teamsters Local 983 from 2014 until 2024, filed his charges at the NLRB with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation. The NLRB is the federal agency tasked with enforcing the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and with adjudicating disputes between employers, unions, and individual workers.
After the Regional Director for NLRB Region 27 issued a formal complaint against the union in July, determining that the charges against the Teamsters for violating Davis’ rights had merit, an NLRB trial had been scheduled for September 29. Teamsters union bosses settled the case to avoid facing federal prosecution for harassing Davis for exercising his rights under the NLRA. Now that Teamsters officials have backed down in the face of overwhelming evidence against them, the trial has been postponed indefinitely.
According to the complaint, four Teamsters Local 983 officials, contrary to federal law, told Davis in front of other workers that informing employees how to exercise their right to resign their union membership was “illegal” and a “federal crime.” These coercive statements led to Davis filing federal charges against Teamsters Local 983. The charges were later amended to include additional allegations against the union that included threats and fines.
In response to the charges being filed, the complaint noted, Teamsters union bosses retaliated against Davis by filing internal union “charges” and imposing a fine upon him.
Under longstanding law, only fully voluntary union members can be subjected to internal union discipline, which often involves fines levied against workers at odds with union boss demands. Workers cannot face discipline for actions that occur after a worker has resigned from union membership.
The NLRB complaint also stated that Teamsters Local 983 maintained unlawful rules barring members from seeking recourse from any outside court or agency, including the NLRB, without first exhausting internal union appeals.
The settlement requires Teamsters Local 983 to post and e-mail a notice informing UPS employees that Teamsters officials “will not” tell them it is “illegal or a federal crime to inform members on how to resign their union membership.” The settlement further requires the Teamsters Local to declare that they “will not” require members to “exhaust internal union remedies” before filing Unfair Labor Practice charges with the NLRB.
In addition to having all Teamsters’ records mentioning the unions charges and fines filed against Davis removed, the settlement also grants NLRB agents access (without notification) to Teamsters offices to confirm compliance.
“We are pleased to have aided Mr. Davis in defending his and other UPS workers’ rights from Teamsters union thugs’ threats and lies,” commented National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “Unfortunately, there is a long history of Teamsters bosses engaging in underhanded, often blatantly illegal, tactics targeting the very rank-and-file workers they purport to ‘represent.’
“Cases like this demonstrate why workers, even former union presidents, need more protections under federal law from union bosses’ abuses who all too frequently target workers who simply voice any dissent,” added Mix.
DOJ Security Guard Union Forced to Pay Back Years of Illegal Union Dues to Avoid Labor Board Prosecution
Under settlement, other Paragon DOJ security guards denied required information can claim refunds for years of union dues payments
Washington, DC (September 14, 2026) – Kywane Johnson, a security guard formerly employed by Paragon Systems at the Department of Justice (DOJ), has prevailed in his three-year dispute with Special Deputy Marshals of America (SDM) union officials. Johnson, who filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), was vindicated when SDM union officials settled to head off a formal NLRB complaint for violating the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by not informing employees of their right to avoid paying for the union’s political activities.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the NLRA, a task that includes adjudicating disputes between unions and individual employees.
Johnson’s charges were filed in 2023, with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, after SDM union bosses repeatedly harassed Johnson for refusing to sign a “dual purpose” union membership card/dues check-off authorization, with union officials escalating by threatening his termination.
The charges detail the harassment occurring despite Johnson having “consistently paid the equivalent of full dues by check to the union since the beginning of his employment.” Once the charges were filed with the NLRB, the agency’s investigation revealed additional violations of employees’ rights by the union, including not informing employees of their Beck right to not pay for union political activities.
Union officials moved to settle with Johnson before the NLRB issued a complaint against the union for its violations of employee rights. Had the complaint been issued, SDM union officials would have faced prosecution for violating the law at an NLRB hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.
The settlement details are comprehensive, requiring the union to post, e-mail and text a 60-day notice, informing Paragon Systems workers that the SDM union will not threaten employees with termination for refusing union membership and/or dues deduction authorization.
Just as important, the settlement requires union officials to refund employees who assert their rights under the National Right to Work Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court CWA v. Beck decision to opt out of funding union politics, retroactively returning improperly seized dues or fees deducted since January 5, 2023.
The settlement also grants NLRB agents access (without notification) to DOJ facilities to confirm compliance.
“We are pleased to have aided Mr. Johnson in asserting his legal right against the bullying and badgering of union bosses,” stated National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Mr. Johnson not only defended his own rights, but obtained a remedy that allows his coworkers to assert their rights and claim refunds for illegally seized union payments going back to the beginning of 2023.
“Union bosses keeping workers they purport to ‘represent’ unaware of their legal rights is, unfortunately, a situation we see repeated all across the country, but it is especially prevalent in the 24 states that do not have Right to Work protections where union bosses can demand payments from employees as a condition of getting or keeping a job,” added Mix.
National Right to Work Foundation Files Brief in Case to Overturn Anti-Worker Biden-Era Labor Board Decision
NLRB’s Cemex precedent conflicts with federal law, wrongly promotes abuse-prone ‘card check’ organizing to detriment of employee rights
Washington, DC (September 11, 2026) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed an amicus brief at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in a case to overturn a Biden-era NLRB decision. The brief argues Cemex must be reversed because it cannot be reconciled with the statutory text of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
The NLRB is the federal agency tasked with enforcing the NLRA and with adjudicating disputes between employers, unions, and individual workers. Under Section 8(b)(7) of the NLRA, Congress said that when a union pickets for recognition, unions have 30 days to file for an election before union picketing becomes an unfair labor practice.
The Foundation’s brief, filed in Amazon.com Services LLC (NLRB Case No. 20-CA-353378), notes that Cemex’s invented 14-day deadline for employers, absent an employer request for an election, to recognize a union after the union demands recognition “cannot be reconciled” with Section 8(b)(7), especially in light of the Supreme Court’s 2024 Loper Bright decision.
The brief notes: “[Cemex] cannot be squared with Section 8(b)(7)…[which] is predicated on the fact that the Act does not obligate employers to recognize unions. And, contrary to Cemex’s requirement that employers petition for an election or recognize the union, Section 8(b)(7) places the burden on unions that picket for recognition to file an election petition to avoid committing an unfair labor practice (‘ULP’).”
The brief also highlights other flaws inherent in Cemex, including that it “incentivizes union recognition based on a mere union demand—regardless of actual majority support—while diminishing use of the best way to determine majority support, secret-ballot elections.”
As the brief points out, Cemex runs contrary to the interests of workers whose votes against unionization are discarded and who have union representation forced on them through the abuse-prone card check method. This disenfranchisement is triggered whenever the Board finds that the employer committed a ULP—even if that violation had no effect on the workers who opposed the union.
Foundation staff attorneys have, and continue to, provide legal assistance for workers in several cases targeted by the abuse-prone card check organizing, including victims of union pressure tactics, lies, and threats. This includes Foundation attorneys specifically challenging the original Cemex decision in a federal court case filed for a Seattle Mariners employee dating back to 2024.
“For roughly three years the Biden Board’s Cemex decision has—in violation of the clear text of federal law—let union bosses’ say-so substitute for what workers actually decide in a private, secret-ballot vote.” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The new NLRB majority should quickly overturn Cemex and other biased Biden and Obama-era precedents on the books that promote union boss power to the detriment of the rights and freedoms of workers.”
Labor Day 2026: Celebrate Workers, Reject Big Labor Coercion
Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation and National Right to Work Committee, issued the following statement on the occasion of Labor Day 2026:
Labor Day exists to honor the hardworking men and women who build and sustain the most prosperous and innovative country in the world. Yet every year as we celebrate them, union officials hijack this holiday to push a coercive agenda that most workers oppose.
Polling clearly shows that Americans at large, and union members in particular, reject Big Labor’s agenda of coercion and forced dues. Celebrating workers must include protecting their Right to Work: trusting each worker to decide for themselves whether to join and financially support a union.
That freedom is too often threatened by those in the halls of power in Washington, D.C. For four years, the Biden Labor Board used one-sided decisions and rule changes to make it harder for workers to vote out unwanted unions, and easier for union officials to organize workplaces without workers ever casting a ballot at all.
Only in recent weeks has the NLRB gained a Trump-appointed majority with the votes to reverse those precedents. Much work remains, including in dozens of cases brought by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, to undo the damage the Biden Board did to employee freedom.
The fight is also playing out in Congress as Big Labor funnels billions in forced dues to advance the so-called ‘PRO Act,’ which would wipe out all 26 state Right to Work laws and force millions more workers to pay up or be fired. The one-page National Right to Work Act, by contrast, would make union membership and dues strictly voluntary nationwide.
That’s what this Labor Day should be about: not forced dues and coerced representation, but the freedom to choose. On behalf of the 8 in 10 Americans who support the Right to Work, we’ll keep fighting until workers everywhere have that fundamental freedom secured.
Washington Security Guard Files Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit Against SPFPA Union for Illegal Religious Discrimination
Complaint: Union officials repeatedly threatened worker with termination if he did not authorize union dues deductions in violation of his religious beliefs
Seattle, WA & Roseville, MI (August 27, 2026) – John Johnson, a security guard in Washington State, has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA). Johnson’s lawsuit was filed in a federal court in Michigan, with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The federal lawsuit details how SPFPA officials are violating Johnson’s rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by refusing to accommodate his sincere religious objection to funding SPFPA or its local affiliate and engaging in quid pro quo harassment by threatening his employment unless he abandons his sincerely held religious beliefs.
Under Title VII, unions and employers must provide a religious accommodation to employees who hold a sincere religious objection to joining or financially supporting a union—except where doing so would impose an undue hardship. The lawsuit notes that rather than granting Johnson his legally required accommodation, SPFPA bosses told him that he would have to abandon his religious objection and pay the union or risk losing his job under the union contract’s forced-dues clause.
According to the lawsuit, Johnson became a target of SPFPA union bosses after he refused to sign a union “interest card,” which he was falsely informed meant that there was “no obligation to join or be a part of” the union. However, a close reading of the card showed that in reality, it would authorize the union to become his monopoly bargaining representative with his employer.
After enough of his colleagues signed these deceptive “interest cards,” SPFPA union bosses were installed at Johnson’s workplace, and SPFPA officials implemented a union contract that requires all employees, including Johnson, to pay dues or fees to the union or be fired. This forced-dues requirement violates Johnson’s religious beliefs.
As his lawsuit explains, SPFPA’s demands that Johnson subsidize union activities violate his faith, which is why he requires a religious accommodation under Title VII. Specifically, Johnson’s faith prohibits him from funding or supporting any organization unless it is done voluntarily, and it forbids him from funding organizations he believes “engage in dishonesty, deception, or misrepresentation.”
In late February, Johnson requested religious accommodation in a letter to SPFPA, offering to pay the equivalent of dues to a charity, a common accommodation for employees with religious objections to funding unions. After several communications with SPFPA officials, Johnson’s religious accommodation request was denied by those officials on April 1, 2026.
Following charges filed against SPFPA with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for illegal religious discrimination under Title VII, the EEOC granted Johnson the right to sue SPFPA in federal court to vindicate his rights under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That allowed Foundation staff attorneys to assist Johnson in filing his federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, the district where SPFPA is headquartered.
“No employee in America should have to choose between compromising their religious convictions and giving in to illegal ‘pay up or be fired’ threats by union bullies,” stated National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Though SPFPA bosses’ actions here represent a clear violation of protections for employees of faith under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, this situation could have been avoided entirely if Johnson enjoyed Right to Work protections to ensure any union payments are strictly voluntary.
“Ultimately, no worker in America should be forced to fund a union they oppose, no matter whether their particular objection to the union is religious or not,” added Mix.
IAFF Local 3631 Settles Case for Denying Retirement Benefits to Nonmember Firefighter
Union bosses attempted to withhold benefits from employee who exercised First Amendment rights under Janus Supreme Court precedent
Irvine, CA (August 24, 2026) – Peter Crary, a Fire Apparatus Engineer who has served his community for over 20 years with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA), has prevailed in his dispute with International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local 3631 union bosses, and OCFA officials. IAFF Local 3631 bosses moved to settle after the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) issued a complaint against the union for violating Crary’s rights. Crary’s settlement was secured with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
Crary filed charges with the PERB against IAFF Local 3631 in late 2025 after union bosses threatened him, stating that as a nonmember, he would be denied access to his retiree healthcare (an IAFF Local 3631 medical benefit trust fund which he contributed to through his wages) unless he rejoined the union and paid back dues for the entire period during which he was a nonmember. The charges detail that forcing union membership and dues payment as a condition for healthcare access is arbitrary and discriminatory, interferes with protected rights, and constitutes a breach of the union’s duty of fair representation.
Charges were also filed against OCFA, noting that while OCFA does not administer IAFF Local 3631’s medical benefit trust fund, as a public agency, its compliance with IAFF Local 3631’s eligibility restrictions based on union membership is a violation of employees’ protected right to refrain from union membership.
Having examined the facts of the case, the PERB issued complaints against IAFF Local 3631 union bosses and OCFA officials, finding that Crary provided sufficient evidence to allege a violation of his rights under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act and move forward with a hearing to establish the violation. To avoid further litigation, IAFF Local 3631 and OCFA have now settled the case with Crary.
Under the settlement, IAFF Local 3631 union bosses are withdrawing and rescinding the union’s policy denying retirement benefits to nonmembers unless they rejoin and pay dues to the union. Additionally, OCFA officials are required to issue a public notice to all OCFA workers informing them that the policy targeting nonmembers has been withdrawn and rescinded.
“I am glad that my complaint and the Foundation’s assistance with reaching a settlement agreement rescinded a policy that I believe coerced firefighters into paying thousands of dollars to rejoin the union in order to avoid losing health insurance in retirement,” stated Crary.
Thanks to the 2018 Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court Janus v. AFSCME case, Crary and all public employees in California can no longer be required to join or pay dues or fees to a union. Despite the Supreme Court’s decision, as this case shows, California government union bosses have sought to undermine employees’ rights, including by discriminating against those who choose to exercise their First Amendment rights under Janus.
“We are pleased to have been able to assist Mr. Crary in defending his Janus rights against union bosses who just cannot accept that union affiliation and financial support must be voluntary for all public employees,” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “Rather than simply attempt to attract the voluntary support of current and retired employees, government union bosses continue to attempt to bully and discriminate against those who choose to exercise their First Amendment rights.
“The Foundation is proud to have secured the Janus victory at the Supreme Court and will continue to assist individuals like Mr. Crary to enforce their rights under Janus,” added Mix.
