Washington, DC (January 21, 2009) — Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Maine state employees can be compelled under penalty of losing their jobs to pay into an international union’s litigation slush fund – even where all the litigation expenditures are made outside of their own bargaining unit.

In doing so, the High Court affirmed a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirming a loose standard of protection under the U.S. Constitution for employees forced to pay dues as a condition of employment.

“America’s workers were not well served by this ruling. The U.S. Supreme Court missed an obvious opportunity to apply explicitly the same ‘strict scrutiny’ standard that applies under the First Amendment to other content-based government restrictions on free speech,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation, which provided free legal aid to the employees asserting their rights.

“Forced unionism is an outrageous situation. It results from actions by politicians to pay back the union bosses who got them elected by handing them the forced union dues of millions of employees in America.”

The employee petitioners in Daniel Locke et al. v. Edward Karass et al., asked the U.S. Supreme Court to provide much-needed clarity to the criteria it had established previously that determine what union activities employees can be lawfully forced to fund.

Unions spend billions of dollars each year on activities such as politics, organizing, litigation, lobbying, and a wide range of other ideological and non-bargaining activities. Yet union officials often claim that non-union members must foot the bill for these activities or be fired from their jobs.

The High Court’s ruling dealt with a special situation where, according to lower courts, employees who pay into a national litigation pooling arrangement could theoretically at some time benefit from litigation expenditures for their own bargaining unit.

“Because of the narrowness of the issue involved, we are optimistic that collateral damage to employee rights will be minimized,” continued Mix. “More fundamentally, however, this decision also highlights the need for state Right to Work laws which prevent union officials from extracting any compulsory dues from individual employees as a condition of employment.”

Locke is the 14th case brought by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

New York, NY (January 16, 2009) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges for an independent cameraman who was threatened with blacklisting unless he joined a union and paid a $5,950 initiation fee.

The case challenges a common, though illegal, practice in the entertainment industry that union officials use to compel actors, employees, and independent contractors to join or pay dues to a union even though they have not continuously worked for an individual employer for the 30 days required by statute.

Brian Johnson, a cameraman employed by ESPN, is occasionally designated as a “daily hire” for the American Broadcasting Company (ABC) when ABC broadcasts ESPN sports programming. ABC and the National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians Local 16 – Communication Workers of America (NABET-CWA) union are party to a monopoly bargaining agreement that governs terms of employment for freelance workers. Under this agreement, workers employed by ABC for 20 days in a year or more than 30 days over a two year period are required to become union members.

However, federal law states that employees cannot be legally forced into a union’s monopoly bargaining ranks unless they work for 30 consecutive days for a single employer. Johnson was never employed by ABC for longer than the prescribed 30 day period. Nevertheless, NABET-CWA Local 16 ordered him to join the union on December 3, 2008.

Union officials also informed Johnson that formal union membership was a condition of future employment with ABC. Under the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent Communication Workers v. Beck, however, employees cannot be compelled become formal, full dues-paying union members as a condition of employment. Workers can be forced to pay certain union fees related to workplace bargaining.

Adding insult to injury, union officials attempted to extract an exorbitant “union initiation fee” of $5,950 from Johnson.

“Even though the entertainment unions’ ‘30 days in two years’ standard has no basis in law, union bosses frequently use this rule to extort money from freelance and part-time workers,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.

“This kind of union dues shake-down scheme is all too common in the entertainment business, and we aim to stop it,” added Gleason. “Workers should be free to decide for themselves whether or not to join a union – and they certainly shouldn’t be shoved into union ranks just to keep a job.”

UAW Tries to Block Employee Election to Toss Out Union at JCIM Grand Rapids

Meanwhile, UAW operatives work to pressure employees at Holland JCIM plant into union ranks

Grand Rapids, MI (January 13, 2009) — A majority of Johnson Controls (JCIM) employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have filed a decertification petition seeking an election to oust the United Auto Workers (UAW) union as the JCIM workers’ monopoly bargaining agent, but UAW union lawyers argued in a formal hearing yesterday that the employees should be barred from access to a decertification election.

JCIM worker Dawn Lambert filed the decertification petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking a secret ballot election to determine whether or not a majority of the workforce wants to retain the UAW union as their monopoly bargaining agent. Under federal labor law governing the private sector, when a union hierarchy has been granted monopoly bargaining authority, it is illegal for any present or future employees – whether they are members of the union or not – to negotiate with their employer for themselves unless they can prove that the union hierarchy does not retain majority support.

A clear majority of the employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have now expressed their intent to remove the UAW. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have also sent a letter to JCIM management demanding that it cease further contract negotiations and also withdraw recognition of what is now a minority union at Talon Court. Under the law, recognizing and negotiating with a union that does not have majority support is an unfair labor practice.

(Continue reading this news release…)

Grand Rapids, MI (January 13, 2009) – A majority of Johnson Controls (JCIM) employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have filed a decertification petition seeking an election to oust the United Auto Workers (UAW) union as the JCIM workers’ monopoly bargaining agent, but UAW union lawyers argued in a formal hearing yesterday that the employees should be barred from access to a decertification election.

JCIM worker Dawn Lambert filed the decertification petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking a secret ballot election to determine whether or not a majority of the workforce wants to retain the UAW union as their monopoly bargaining agent. Under federal labor law governing the private sector, when a union hierarchy has been granted monopoly bargaining authority, it is illegal for any present or future employees – whether they are members of the union or not – to negotiate with their employer for themselves unless they can prove that the union hierarchy does not retain majority support.

A clear majority of the employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have now expressed their intent to remove the UAW. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have also sent a letter to JCIM management demanding that it cease further contract negotiations and also withdraw recognition of what is now a minority union at Talon Court. Under the law, recognizing and negotiating with a union that does not have majority support is an unfair labor practice.

However, in yesterday’s hearing, union lawyers claimed that the plant is not its own bargaining group but had been sucked into a large amorphous group that includes other JCIM plants across America, making the petition by a majority of Talon Court workers insufficient to trigger a decertification. Of course, it would be nearly impossible for employees to organize and muster a broad effort at unknown facilities far away from Grand Rapids. This UAW claim flies in the face of the fact that the union officials and management have been bargaining over local issues, and that a local contract is not in place after nearly two years since the union became the monopoly bargaining agent at Talon Court.

“Despite over 50 percent of employees wanting the union gone, bosses have the nerve to deny them even a vote,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Apparently the UAW is like a roach motel, easy to get in, but nearly impossible to leave.”

The decertification drive against the UAW in Kentwood comes amidst a UAW campaign to unionize JCIM workers in nearby Holland. In Holland, UAW union bosses have pressured JCIM to provide union organizers with access to company facilities and sensitive personal information about its employees, including their names, phone numbers, and home addresses.

Union bosses apparently intend to use this information to pressure employees to sign union authorization cards at work and at home. In fact, union operatives are also planning a captive audience meeting later this week to pressure workers to sign the cards. History shows that during “card check” campaigns union organizers frequently harass and even mislead workers into signing these cards with the ultimate goal of installing the union without even the minimal protections of a secret ballot election. Additionally, union officials will doubtlessly fail to tell Holland employees that they will not be able to vote the union out.

Today, the National Right to Work Foundation announced it will file a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission on behalf of two Alabama educators and itself against the National Education Association teacher union and two NEA affiliates for an illegal political fundraising scheme by the union hierarchy:

Washington, DC (January 13, 2009) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation announced today it will file a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) asking it to investigate charges made by two Alabama educators who discovered a union scheme to divert their money into the National Education Association’s (NEA) political action committee (PAC).

Claire Waites, the chair of the science department, and Dr. Jeanne Fox, an assistant principal, both work at Daphne Middle School in Bay Minette, Alabama. Waites and Fox are both members of the Baldwin County Education Association (BCEA), Alabama Education Association (AEA), and NEA teacher unions.

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

Read the rest of the Foundation’s press release here. A PDF copy of the complaint is available here.

Washington, DC (January 13, 2009) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation announced today it will file a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) asking it to investigate charges made by two Alabama educators who discovered a union scheme to divert their money into the National Education Association’s (NEA) political action committee (PAC).

Claire Waites, the chair of the science department, and Dr. Jeanne Fox, an assistant principal, both work at Daphne Middle School in Bay Minette, Alabama. Waites and Fox are both members of the Baldwin County Education Association (BCEA), Alabama Education Association (AEA), and NEA teacher unions.

In July 2008, Waites and Fox attended the NEA’s annual convention in Washington, DC, as delegates of the BCEA. By telephone, BCEA union president Saadia Hunter informed Waites and Fox that contributions to a “children’s fund” in their names were made from 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, the NEA Fund for Children and Public Education.

Later, Hunter admitted that the money would be contributed to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Sworn statements by Waites and Fox indicate that the AEA union boss also admitted that the PAC contributions were paid with BCEA members’ dues. However, it is illegal for unions to contribute to political candidates using “dues, fees, or other moneys required as a condition of membership in a labor organization.”

Teacher union officials also violated federal law by encouraging and soliciting contributions under false pretenses and without informing Waites or Fox of their right to refuse to contribute without any reprisal. Federal law also forbids campaign contributions made in the name of another person.

“This union money laundering scheme makes a mockery of federal election law,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation, which has joined Waites and Fox as a complainant. “We suspect this scheme was widely used by the NEA union hierarchy and could involve hundreds of thousands of dollars. We urge the FEC to take decisive action.”

Chicago, IL (January 5, 2009) –The National Labor Relations Board has announced that it will prosecute International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 731 union officials for illegally imposing exorbitant retaliatory fines on several hard-working employees at a local company.

In September of 2008, nine employees at Lechner and Sons filed unfair labor practice charges against Local 731 with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation. The charges requested the prosecution of the union for imposing fines ranging from $13,946 to $40,000 on employees for working during a strike, despite the fact that none of the employees were voluntary union members. Union officials never informed any of the employees of their rights to refrain from formal union membership and to pay a reduced amount of compulsory dues. Instead, union officials misled employees into believing that formal, full dues-paying membership was a condition of employment.

Under the Foundation-won precedent Communication Workers v. Beck, employees have the right to refrain from funding union activities unrelated to collective bargaining. Union officials are also required to inform employees of their right to refrain from full dues-paying membership. Unless informed of these rights, workers cannot be considered “voluntary members” of a union and therefore cannot be subjected to internal union discipline.

In July 2006, union bosses decided that the employees, all truck drivers, should abandon their jobs during a so-called “sympathy strike” on behalf of a different bargaining unit at the plant. After the strike ended in June 2007, union brass attempted to discipline non-striking employees by levying several fines.

The workers whom union bosses attempted to discipline included two nonunion employees who worked during the strike. Union officials also illegally threatened to bar one employee from ever working at a “union shop” again if he refused to pay the assigned penalty. All of the employees misled into membership have now resigned from the union.

“Union bosses tricked employees into joining their union and then used their position to exact outrageous and devastating financial penalties,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Without a Right to Work law, workers in states like Illinois are all too vulnerable to this type of employee intimidation.”

A Right to Work law would allow employees to decide individually whether or not to join a union and pay union dues. The NLRB agreed to prosecute seven of the charges filed for fined Lechner and Sons workers by the Foundation. Foundation attorneys plan on appealing the NLRB’s decision not to pursue similar charges filed by two additional employees.

In Pennsylvania, staff attorneys from the Foundation helped four air traffic controllers reach a settlement with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) union. NATCA union officials were illegally forcing nonmember employees to financially support union activities unrelated to collective bargaining, as well as refusing to provide a legally required independent financial audit of forced-dues union expenditures:

Harrisburg, PA (December 29, 2008) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, four air traffic controllers have forced National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) union officials to halt their illegal forced union dues extraction methods.

The settlement is a result of unfair labor practice charges filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by Foundation attorneys for the four controllers in September 2008. The unfair labor practice charges challenged the union officials’ confiscatory scheme of forcing nonmember employees to support financially union activities unrelated to collective bargaining, as well as their refusal to provide a legally required independent financial audit of forced-dues union expenditures. The charges also challenged the union hierarchy’s policy that forced nonunion employees to object annually to full, forced-dues paying union membership.

Finalized today, the settlement requires union officials to post public notices informing affected controllers of their right to refrain from formal, full dues-paying membership. The notice also rescinds the union’s onerous annual objection policy – a policy that requires nonunion members annually to inform union officials of their decision not to pay for union activities unrelated to collective bargaining – and commits union officials to providing employees with an audited financial breakdown of all organizational expenditures. The union hierarchy has also agreed to allow nonunion workers to challenge retroactively dues payments unrelated to workplace representation.

Read the rest of the Foundation’s press release here.

Harrisburg, PA (December 29, 2008) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, four air traffic controllers have forced National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) union officials to halt their illegal forced union dues extraction methods.

The settlement is a result of unfair labor practice charges filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by Foundation attorneys for the four controllers in September 2008. The unfair labor practice charges challenged the union officials’ confiscatory scheme of forcing nonmember employees to support financially union activities unrelated to collective bargaining, as well as their refusal to provide a legally required independent financial audit of forced-dues union expenditures. The charges also challenged the union hierarchy’s policy that forced nonunion employees to object annually to full, forced-dues paying union membership.

Finalized today, the settlement requires union officials to post public notices informing affected controllers of their right to refrain from formal, full dues-paying membership. The notice also rescinds the union’s onerous annual objection policy – a policy that requires nonunion members annually to inform union officials of their decision not to pay for union activities unrelated to collective bargaining – and commits union officials to providing employees with an audited financial breakdown of all organizational expenditures. The union hierarchy has also agreed to allow nonunion workers to challenge retroactively dues payments unrelated to workplace representation.

Under the Foundation-won precedent established in the Supreme Court case Communications Workers v. Beck, all private sector employees are entitled to refrain from formal, full dues-paying union membership. The Foundation’s Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson Supreme Court victory also requires unions to provide employees with an independently-audited financial breakdown of all forced-dues union expenditures. The financial breakdown originally provided by NATCA officials was vague and did not include an independent audit.

“NATCA union officials kept the rank-and-file in the dark to keep the union’s forced dues gravy train going.” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Although we applaud the NLRB for reaching an equitable settlement, this type of abuse will remain all too common until Pennsylvania enacts a Right to Work law. Making union membership and dues payment completely voluntary is the only way to make union officials accountable.”

The NATCA union is an affiliate of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). Airport sites where NATCA officials enjoy monopoly bargaining privileges over private sector air traffic controllers include Bridgeport, Connecticut; Alton, Illinois; Marion, Illinois; Barnes, Massachusetts; Hyannis, Massachusetts; Worchester, Massachusetts; Middle River, Maryland; Lebanon Tower, New Hampshire; Ithaca, New York; Stewart, New York; Latrobe, Pennsylvania; Kenosha, Wisconsin, and Mosinee, Wisconsin.

National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason made the following statement after the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld union lawyers’ motion to dismiss of the case challenging a corrupt quid-pro-quo organizing agreement reached by Freightliner and UAW union officials in North and South Carolina:

Regrettably, the court severely misread and misinterpreted the statute. "Things of value" as defined under numerous federal statutes have long been held by courts to include intangible or non-monetary benefits.

The Congressional intent of the statute was to prevent employers from inducing union officials to bargain away workers’ interests. That is exactly what was done here. Freightliner gave the UAW union officials organizing assistance that the court concedes is a "benefit" to the union. This benefit included preferred access to the employees, pro-union captive audience meetings on paid company time to solicit union authorization cards, employer silence, and an agreement that only the UAW would be able to recruit new dues payers without a secret ballot election.

These are most certainly "things of value" no matter how that term is defined — subjective value, objective value, monetary value, etc. In fact, unions spend millions of dollars on corporate campaigns to attack companies with the very goal of obtaining these valuable advantages.

In return, the UAW hierarchy agreed to pre-negotiated contract concessions, and even the cancelling of certain employee benefits at other facilities. All of this was done before the employees had shown any interest in having UAW union officials represent them.

At the motion to dismiss phase, the allegations of the complaint must be taken as true. Therefore, even under the appellate court’s holding that an ascertainable monetary value is required under 302, the U.S. District Court’s dismissal of the complaint should have been reversed and case remanded for fact finding as to monetary value, which can easily be established.

Apparently union officials think they are entitled to another exception in federal criminal rules and procedures.

The union-abused employees represented by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys are likely to ask for a rehearing en banc or petition to the U.S. Supreme Court to correct this miscarriage of justice.

The decision can be downloaded here. Background on the case can be found here.