In this issue:

• Supreme Court Asked to Uphold First Amendment Rights of Childcare Providers
• Stop & Shop Strike Fallout: Grocery Worker Hits UFCW with Two Federal Charges
• Foundation Staff Attorney Testifies Before Congressional Hearing on Labor Law
• Feds Close Obama-Era Loophole Sanctioning Big Labor Medicaid Skim
• Airline Workers Contest Union ‘Opt-Out’ Requirement for Political Dues
• UConn Professor Receives Over $5,000 in Post-Janus Settlement

To view other editions or sign up for a free copy of the newsletter via mail, click here.

Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy recently issued an executive order to protect the First Amendment rights of all state employees under the Janus v. AFSCME decision won by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation at the United States Supreme Court in June 2018.

Under the new rule, adopted following a formal opinion by Alaska Attorney General Kevin Clarkson, the state will deduct union fees only from the paychecks of employees who have filed a waiver with the state acknowledging their wishes to have union dues taken from their paychecks despite their right under Janus not to fund any union activities.

Tho order follows an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal by National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix and veteran Foundation staff attorney William Messenger (who argued the Janus case at the Supreme Court) which encouraged Gov. Dunleavy to take this proactive step to enforce the Janus decision in Alaska, and also urged elected officials in other states to follow Alaska’s example:

Politicians in state capitals where Big Labor has a stranglehold are resisting compliance with Janus. Faced with both government and union resistance, public employees have filed dozens of lawsuits seeking to stop unions from seizing money from their paychecks.

But not all elected officials are so beholden to union bosses. Some are willing to put employee freedom before the interests of union officials. Alaska started that process Tuesday when, at the request of Gov. Mike Dunleavy, Attorney General Kevin Clarkson issued a formal opinion delineating how the state must change its payroll process to comply with Janus by ensuring that employees “freely and knowingly consented to have dues deducted from their paychecks.” Alaska’s solution includes stopping dues deductions absent an annual renewal of the waiver.

Hundreds of millions of dollars are being taken out of workers’ paychecks each month without any evidence that they waived their First Amendment right not to fund union activities, including partisan electioneering. Other state officials, along with federal agencies, should follow Alaska’s example.

The complete op-ed is available online here.

Public sector workers can learn more about their First Amendment rights under the Janus decision by visiting MyJanusRights.org.

Today, National Right to Work President Mark Mix was published in the Investor’s Business Daily exposing how General Motors (GM) and United Autoworker (UAW) union bosses colluded to use taxpayer dollars to "pay back" the taxpayers for the government bail out it received last year:

…GM leaders and the UAW officials who colluded with them to extract $43 billion out of taxpayers in exchange for arguably worthless stock are now patting themselves on the back for paying back on April 21 the balance of a $6.7 billion loan they took out from taxpayers as part of the 2009 bankruptcy package.

In a weekly radio address to the nation late last month, President Obama suggested that the fact that taxpayers have now recouped 14% of the taxes he diverted into GM coffers on their behalf vindicates his decision to bail out GM and the UAW brass.

But ordinary Americans, with whom the GM and Chrysler bailouts have become overwhelmingly unpopular over the past year, are unlikely to agree. Especially not if they learn that GM was able to "pay back" the loan only because it had not yet spent all of the other $43 billion in taxpayer money it raked in last year.

But, as Mix further notes, the mirage that GM and UAW officials are being fiscally responsible with the taxpayer’s money is just part of their plan to ask for even more money from the government:

…[T]he apparent motive of Obama-selected GM CEO Ed Whitacre and UAW officials in repaying the $6.7 billion now is to pave the way for the company to secure a new $10 billion loan from taxpayers at an interest rate of just 5%, two points lower than the previous rate, to pay for the retooling of its plants to meet the government’s new, stricter fuel-economy standards.

If the GM/UAW "zombie" corporation obtains the new $10 billion government loan, it will end up even more deeply in hock to taxpayers than before, after having gotten good PR and kudos from the president for having paid off its original loan "in full."

Fortunately, the American people are not as easily bamboozled as President Obama and his cohorts in the GM and UAW union hierarchies seem to think they are.

Mix concludes that "the president’s fork-tongued reassurances that all is going well with the bailouts are likely to make Americans angrier and angrier as time goes on" because his special deals and political paybacks to his Big Labor buddies are more than American families can bear, and serves no purpose other than to enrich Big Labor’s coffers.

Last week, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed recusal motions asking Craig Becker, President Barack Obama’s recess appointee to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), to remove himself from any pending cases involving Foundation attorneys based on his personal bias and malice toward the organization, as revealed by his published writings about the Foundation. Let’s take a closer look.

In a 2005 article in the Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, Becker described the Foundation as "an organization that purports to represent employees…."

Only the most rabid and unthinking forced unionism militant can’t see indisputable evidence that Foundation attorneys only provide free legal aid to workers. As the Washington Examiner’s Mark Hemingway notes in a column about Becker’s bias,

Unions try and portray the organization as a shill for big business, but the fact is that National Right to Work is the only organization providing free legal aid to workers with grievances against their union, and is otherwise responsible for doing a lot to keep unions in check.

Currently, Foundation attorneys are assisting thousands of employees in over 200 cases nationwide. The Foundation’s legal aid program is designed to enforce employees’ existing legal rights against forced unionism abuses and to win new legal precedents expanding these rights and protections.  Here’s a sample:

• Last month, Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges on behalf of Nestor Mendez, a former Vons grocery store worker who was wrongfully fired on December 14, 2009 at the request of local UFCW union officials.  Mendez seeks financial compensation for lost wages and reinstatement of his position.
• In 2001, with help from Foundation attorneys, Rod Carter received a monetary settlement from Teamsters Local 769 for its direct involvement in a bloody attack on Carter during a nationwide strike against UPS. 
• Foundation attorneys are at the forefront in protecting religious objectors’ rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  In one case, a Ohio Education Association union official told a 21-year veteran teacher to "change religions" if she wanted a religious accommodation.
• Last year Foundation attorneys helped secure a settlement for five Phoenix-based employees who filed a federal lawsuit against their employer and IBEW Local 1269 union officials for a corrupt scheme to divert sales commissions from the employees to union officials. Some of the methods used to increase the union agents’ compensation included giving union agents “double commissions” for sales made by other workers.

Why else but malice would Craig Becker write that the National Right to Work Foundation “purports to represent employees”? Foundation attorneys do not just claim to provide free legal aid to workers. They do it on a daily basis.

The undercurrent of Craig Becker’s agenda is that individual employees are irrelevant in the workplace and should be afforded no recourse against the union operatives who violate their rights.  The Right to Work principle makes no judgment on whether workers should join or support a union for whatever reason. That is a decision best left up to the individual.  The Right to Work principle is therefore not "anti-union" but anti-compulsory unionism and pro-freedom of choice. Freedom of association is a basic right, but today’s unions operate via forced association.

It’s worth noting that the Foundation is entirely supported by voluntary contributions from individuals, foundations, and job providers — unlike unions, which rely on using the power of the state to seize money straight out of unwilling workers’ paychecks.  In fact, Foundation supporters come from all walks of life, sections of the country, and social backgrounds.  The vast majority of Foundation contributors — tens of thousands of concerned citizens — give $100 or less each year.

There’s nothing remotely "fringe" about our principle, and that’s why 22 states have adopted Right to Work laws and nearly 80% of the American people agree that no worker should ever be forced to associate with a union to get or keep a job.

If you do want to find fringe views on labor law, look no further than Craig Becker himself.  "At first blush it might seem fair to give workers the choice to remain unrepresented," Becker wrote in a 1998 New Labor Forum article.  Sorry, Member Becker: it’s always fair to give workers a choice no matter how many ways you look at it.

Today, Craig Becker – Associate General Counsel for the AFL-CIO and radical SEIU – officially took his seat on the National Labor Relations Board. For a rundown of Craig Becker’s controversial recess appointment to the NLRB, listen to these two recent radio interviews featuring National Right to Work President Mark Mix.

First, Mark Mix sat down with nationally-syndicated radio host Lars Larson for a short primer on Becker’s forced unionism agenda. Click here to listen or use the emebedded player below:

Second, here’s a longer interview with Mix from the Jason Lewis Show on Becker’s radical views. Click here to listen or use the embedded player below:

As always, you can also listen to the Foundation’s podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.

Right to Work Vice President Doug Stafford sat down with nationally-syndicated radio host Lars Larson to discuss Big Labor’s Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill. Click here to listen or use the embedded player below:

You can also listen to the Foundation’s podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.

At The Daily Caller, the anonymous Anchorman — "a well-known news anchor from a top-10, big-city news station" — brings up an interesting point about his colleagues’ political coverage. The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) union "represents" most television network news correspondents and anchors.  That "representation" includes political advocacy, including as the anchorman points out, lobbying efforts on the health care / forced unionization legislation currently pending in Congress.

If that bothers you, you should also know that your “objective” network correspondent, roaming the halls of Congress right now trying to ferret out the “truth,” probably pays hundreds, or even thousands of dollars in union dues to AFTRA every year. He or she, in all likelihood, depends on AFTRA for one of those “Cadillac” health insurance plans that is the subject of so much debate. He or she also will receive a nice little AFTRA pension come retirement time, and perhaps most importantly, will depend on AFTRA to help defend, protect or advise them in any serious conflicts, demotions, firings, or legal issues with management at their TV station or network.

Might this conflict of interest also impact the media’s coverage of the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill?  We’d be surprised if it didn’t affect some reporters’ objectivity  In fact, here’s the kind of analysis of that bill you won’t see on the nightly news.

Last month, the Senate rejected an attempt to confirm President Barack Obama’s nomination of pro-compulsory unionism radical Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The Wall Street Journal reports that with the Senate now taking it’s Easter recess, Becker could be appointed via a recess appointment "as early as today."

As the Journal notes, a Craig Becker NLRB appointment resurrection would be disastrous to employee rights:

Mr. Becker has written extensively about the National Labor Relations Act, the law that the NLRB interprets and enforces. In a 1993 Minnesota Law Review article, he said that the "core defect in union election law . . . is the employer’s status as a party to labor representation proceedings" and that "employers should be stripped of any legally cognizable interest in their employees’ election of representatives."

In other words, you can forget about employees getting truthful and non-coercive information about the downsides of unionization.

But there’s more.  Becker has publicly argued union goons should have the privilege to repeatedly harass workers at home until the workers sign "card check" union authorization cards; advocated allowing government arbiters impose contracts on workers without even allowing the workers to vote on the contract; and has even compared union organizing elections to US Congressional elections, stating that the only question decided in such elections should be which union gets monopoly control over workers, not whether they wish to remain independent and union free.

Or as the Journal puts it, "the modern union movement is bloody-minded about the will to power and Mr. Becker is one of its fiercest partisans."

Meanwhile, Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, expressed some additional concerns regarding Becker’s extreme forced unionism record in this morning’s Washington Times:

Mark Mix of the National Right to Work organization reports that in 2007 alone, Mr. Becker’s lawyering forced 63,000 California workers to pay union dues even after rejecting union membership. He [encouraged] repeated "home visits" for union backers, designed to pressure workers to sign public union-organizing petitions. Unions were "formed to escape the evils of individualism and individual competition. … Their actions necessarily involve coercion," Mr. Becker once explained.

To view more information on Big Labor sycophant Craig Becker’s radical views, check out this National Right to Work Committee special video report: