Federal Labor Board Rejects Frivolous Teamster Union Charges Against National Right to Work Foundation

Fearing a lack of support, union bosses attempt to abuse process to prevent employee election

Seattle, WA (February 2, 2010) – The National Labor Relation Board’s (NLRB) regional office in Seattle has dismissed as unwarranted and unsupported frivolous charges filed by Teamsters union officials against the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

Teamsters Local 117 union bosses filed the unfair labor practice charges against the Foundation in a desperate attempt to stall an employee vote at Alan Ritchey, Inc. which would allow the employees to rescind the union hierarchy’s forced dues privileges – which requires employees to pay union dues and fees as a condition of keeping their jobs.

After reviewing the charges, the NLRB regional director in Seattle outright rejected the charges as unwarranted and unsupported.

Click here to read the full release.

Seattle, WA (February 2, 2010) – The National Labor Relation Board’s (NLRB) regional office in Seattle has dismissed as unwarranted and unsupported frivolous charges filed by Teamsters union officials against the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

Teamsters Local 117 union bosses filed the unfair labor practice charges against the Foundation in a desperate attempt to stall an employee vote at Alan Ritchey, Inc. which would allow the employees to rescind the union hierarchy’s forced dues privileges – which requires employees to pay union dues and fees as a condition of keeping their jobs.

After reviewing the charges, the NLRB regional director in Seattle outright rejected the charges as unwarranted and unsupported.

In November, Alan Ritchey employees Gayle May and Patricia Allen contacted the Foundation after union bosses circulated a letter threatening that they would be subject to discharge in 2-3 days unless they notified the union whether their status was as members or objecting nonmembers who do not wish to pay for the union’s activities such as political activism, legislative lobbying and union social events. However, May, Allen and other employees were already on record with the union as being nonmember objectors. Thus, it appeared that union officials were simply trying to intimidate them.

With help from Foundation attorneys, May and Allen – acting for dozens of other similarly-situated employees of the mail transportation equipment repair and service center – filed unfair labor practice charges against Local 117 in November.

About the same time, other Alan Ritchey employees filed a petition seeking a deauthorization election, which could void the forced union dues clause in the contract with their employer. In a move seemingly designed to prevent the election, Local 117 union bosses filed the charges against the Foundation, which blocked the employee vote.

“With Teamsters Local 117 union bosses focusing their energies on harassing independent-minded employees who exercise their rights, it’s little wonder these employees want to strip the union bosses of their forced dues privileges,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director of the National Right to Work Foundation.

Foundation attorneys won private-sector employees the right to refrain from funding non-bargaining union boss activities in the 1988 Communications Workers of America v. Beck U.S. Supreme Court decision. However, only through the protection of a Right to Work law is an employee’s decision whether to support a union with their hard-earned money fully voluntary.

Indianapolis, IN (February 1, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, an Indianapolis bus driver has filed federal unfair labor practice charges challenging American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 3826 union officials’ discriminatory workplace practices.

Barry Hickman is a bus driver employed by First Student in Indianapolis, Indiana. As an employee in a unionized workplace, he is forced to accept union monopoly bargaining and pay certain union dues to Local 3826. Hickman was also involved in a prolonged legal battle to opt out of paying dues for union political activism, which was finally resolved in 2009 when AFSCME officials acknowledged his right not to fund their political activities.

However, Hickman and similarly situated employees have been targeted for workplace discrimination by union officials. AFSCME bosses are retaliating against Hickman and his coworkers because they previously filed unfair labor practice charges against the union with the assistance of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

At issue in these new charges is a scheme to manipulate First Student’s extra trip list to artificially limit the earnings of Hickman and other employees who object to the union’s activities. The trip list assigns First Student drivers additional compensation for driving trips beyond scheduled routes. Union officials manipulated the list to limit nonunion drivers’ access to extra trips. When Hickman asked to review the extra trip list, union officials told him to get a lawyer.

Hickman’s charges allege that these practices violate the National Labor Relations Act and the union’s duty of representation, which grants union officials the power to ‘represent’ all workers in a bargaining unit, regardless of their union membership status. The charges will now be investigated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

“AFSCME union bosses are always eager to keep independent-minded workers in line and paying forced dues, and this discriminatory policy is just one more ugly example of how employees who bravely stand up to union intimidation are treated,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Mr. Hickman shouldn’t have to ‘get a lawyer’ to ensure he’s treated fairly on the job, but union bosses forced his hand.”

“Ultimately, passing a Right to Work law in Indiana would go a long way towards curbing this type of ugly retaliation by union bosses against the employees they claim to represent,” Semmens continued.

Philadelphia, PA (January 28, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Philadelphia nurse has filed federal charges challenging an attempt by her employer and outside union organizers to ignore the results of a workplace election rejecting unionization.

Joanne K. McGovern is a registered nurse employed by Hahnemann University Hospital, a medical facility owned and operated by Tenet Healthcare Corporation. McGovern and her hospital coworkers recently endured a prolonged organizing drive, during which union operatives from the California Nurses Association (CNA) union and its local affiliate, the Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses and Allied Professionals (PASNAP) union, attempted to impose unionization on hospital employees.

Despite a backroom deal between the CNA union and Tenet that suppressed employee opposition to unionization and granted union organizers preferential access to hospital facilities, the nurses voted against the CNA in June 2009.

Undeterred by this setback, union lawyers have turned to private arbitration and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to block the certification of this result, claiming that CNA organizers were intimidated during the organizing drive.

Although the NLRB has yet to rule on these claims or even hold a hearing, hospital and union officials recently agreed to disregard the election results anyway. In November 2009, the CNA union and the hospital announced plans for a new unionization election despite the fact that the NLRB has not invalidated the results of the last workplace election.

McGovern’s charges challenge the legality of this move, arguing that workers who have already voted should not be subjected to repeated elections until they submit to unionization. The charges will now be investigated by the NLRB.

“After getting roundly rejected by Hahnemann nurses, union officials just won’t take no for an answer,” said Patrick Semmens, director of legal information for the National Right to Work Foundation. “By attempting to stifle hospital workers’ votes against unionization, CNA bosses have shown that their real goal is pushing nurses into the union’s forced dues-paying ranks, like it or not.”

Citizen Activist Seeks to Bring Union Boss Lobbying Disclosure Battle to Michigan Supreme Court

Teacher union bosses hiding taxpayer-funded political communications from public

Detroit, MI (January 28, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a citizen activist announced today he will file an appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court in an ongoing public disclosure battle over the use of school district e-mail systems for union political activities.

In 2007, political activist Chetly Zarko from DeWitt – invoking Michigan’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosure law – requested e-mail communications among Howell Education Association (HEA) union brass regarding heated collective bargaining negotiations between the Howell Public School (HPS) system and union officials. The HEA union is a local affiliate of the Michigan Education Association and National Education Association unions.

At the time of the collective bargaining conflict, Zarko suspected union boss lobbying was occurring at taxpayer expense. Zarko is seeking the release of approximately 5,500 e-mails between the union hierarchy and teachers.

Click here to read the full release.

Detroit, MI (January 28, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a citizen activist announced today he will file an appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court in an ongoing public disclosure battle over the use of school district e-mail systems for union political activities.

In 2007, political activist Chetly Zarko from DeWitt – invoking Michigan’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosure law – requested e-mail communications among Howell Education Association (HEA) union brass regarding heated bargaining negotiations between the Howell Public School (HPS) system and union officials. The HEA union is a local affiliate of the Michigan Education Association and National Education Association unions.

At the time of the collective bargaining conflict, Zarko suspected union boss lobbying was occurring at taxpayer expense. Zarko is seeking the release of approximately 5,500 e-mails between the union hierarchy and teachers.

HEA union officials claimed a special exception from the requirements of Michigan’s FOIA law, despite the fact that the e-mails were sent over a taxpayer funded e-mail system and the HPS’s “Acceptable Use Policy” explicitly states that e-mails sent on the server are “not consider private communication [and] may be re-posted.”

Foundation attorneys won a ruling from the Livingston Circuit Court requiring disclosure, but union lawyers managed to convince the State of Michigan Court of Appeals to overturn the lower court’s decision.

“Public resources should not be spent on the shadowy and self-serving political activities of union bosses,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Howell Education Association union officials should be subject to the same public disclosure requirements as everyone else who uses taxpayer funds.”

In 2007, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys persuaded the National Labor Relations Board to establish new rights for workers through the landmark Dana/Metaldyne decision.  The ruling empowered workers to call a vote to kick out an unwanted union during a 45-day window period following a successful “card check” organizing drive.

The ruling was a rebuke of union organizers and their coercive tactics, as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) acknowledged the abuses, and determined that employees needed a way to challenge the imposition of a union workplace monopoly via card check by obtaining a secret ballot decertification election.

Prior to the Obama Administration, the NLRB maintained an online database of all card check recognitions and any subsequent union decertification elections. The NLRB, however, stopped updating this information111 last spring. Foundation attorneys recently demanded the NLRB to update the database regularly, and NLRB Chairman Wilma Liebman responded last week.  Although she blamed the General Counsel’s office for the neglect, she stated the agency would post new information monthly going forward.

While this information doesn’t prevent coercive card check organizing on the job – an increasingly common union tactic even without passage of the pending EFCA legislation in Congress – it does help the public see how widely used this abusive union organizing actually is… and which companies have blocked their employees’ access to secret balloting.

Perhaps even more importantly, this data reveals the nasty little fact that card check signing does not represent employees’ true wishes.  For in many cases, the very union bosses who came in through card check were sent packing — only days later — after employees obtained a secret ballot vote.

Worker Advocate Seeks Biased Agency Members’ Recusal on Controversial Transportation Union Rule Change

Former airline union officials should not use federal power to help their unions corral tens of thousands of workers into union membership

Washington, DC (January 19, 2010) – Citing substantial legal precedent, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has filed a motion with the National Mediation Board (NMB) seeking the recusal of the two former union officials who are behind a dramatic rule change proposal on how a union is imposed on non-union railway and airline industry workers.

The NMB, the federal agency tasked with mediating labor disputes within the railroad and airline industries, is quietly rolling back 75 years of precedent and changing labor union organizing regulations, greasing the skids for union organizers to lock industry workers into union ranks.

The two board members who now comprise the majority of the board, Harry Hoglander and Linda Puchala, were both appointed by President Barack Obama and were executive officers for two of the very unions pushing for the changes.

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (January 19, 2010) – Citing substantial legal precedent, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has filed a motion with the National Mediation Board (NMB) seeking the recusal of the two former union officials who are behind a dramatic rule change proposal on how a union is imposed on non-union railway and airline industry workers.

The NMB, the federal agency tasked with mediating labor disputes within the railroad and airline industries, is quietly rolling back 75 years of precedent and changing labor union organizing regulations, greasing the skids for union organizers to lock industry workers into union ranks.

The two board members who now comprise the majority of the board, Harry Hoglander and Linda Puchala, were both appointed by President Barack Obama and were executive officers for two of the very unions pushing for the changes.

Hoglander was a union official with the Air Line Pilots Association union and Puchala was an officer of the Association of Flight Attendants union. Both unions are a major part of an American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) union-led coalition urging the NMB to discard its policy of requiring a true majority of all workers within a collective bargaining unit to decide for themselves if they wish to be represented by a union. The new procedure would stack the deck in favor of unionization by requiring only a majority of workers actually voting in a union organizing election to make that decision for the whole group.

The members voted 2-1 to preliminarily support the controversial change, and NMB Chair Elizabeth Dougherty has criticized the hasty actions of the two members.

“President Obama’s appointed Big Labor operatives on the National Mediation Board should recuse themselves from this controversial effort to give union bosses the upper hand over independent-minded workers,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of National Right to Work. “If these members do not recuse themselves, the NMB’s actions will betray the integrity of government decision-making as well as President Obama’s pledge that his personnel would avoid these very violations of ethics.”

Foundation attorneys have previously appeared before the NMB asking for the proposed change to be rejected because it would make it exceedingly difficult for independent-minded workers to resist Big Labor’s well-funded, professional organizing machine, particularly since these campaigns must be run across entire, often-nationwide bargaining units. The proposed change also imposes a greater burden on employees who wish to refrain from union membership by forcing them to either take affirmative action to oppose the union or otherwise potentially allow far less than a majority to make that decision for them.

Washington, DC (January 5, 2010) – Apparently without conducting a field investigation, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) dismissed a complaint against one of the most politically active unions in America after evidence surfaced that union officials deposited illegally laundered dues money into its political action committee (PAC).

Citing in part lack of sufficient funding to enforce the law, the FEC junked a complaint filed by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and two Alabama teachers who discovered a union scheme to divert convention reimbursements into the National Education Association (NEA) union’s PAC.

When attending the NEA’s 2004 national convention, Daphne Middle School science department chair Claire Waites was deceived into supporting the NEA’s PAC and was determined that it would not happen again. However, Waites and Assistant Principal Dr. Jeanne Fox, both members of the Baldwin County Education Association (BCEA), Alabama Education Association (AEA), and NEA unions, discovered the practice continues.

In July 2008, Waites and Fox attended the NEA’s annual convention in Washington, DC as delegates of the BCEA. According to their sworn testimony, BCEA union president Saadia Hunter informed the educators that contributions in their names were made to a “children’s fund” using money included in their expense reimbursements for their trip to the convention.

Although Hunter told Waites that these contributions were not political in nature, they actually went to the NEA’s PAC. Hunter later admitted that the money would be contributed to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. AEA union bosses also admitted to the educators that the PAC contributions were paid with BCEA members’ dues.

Foundation attorneys are considering a lawsuit against the FEC for shirking its duty of upholding the integrity of the political system, particularly since it is suspected this scheme affected many other teacher delegates to the union convention.

“The FEC made a conscious decision to not take these charges seriously,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “We suspect this scheme could involve many more teachers – potentially to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

It is illegal for union officials to encourage and solicit contributions under false pretenses and without informing workers of their right to refuse to contribute without any reprisal. Federal law also forbids campaign contributions made in the name of another person.