St. HOPE Charter School Teachers Win Effort to Remove Union Officials From Power
Having failed to stop decertification vote requested by majority of teachers, Sacramento City Teachers Association union bosses concede defeat and leave
Sacramento, CA (March 5, 2026) – Following an effort in which a majority of teachers demanded a vote to remove the union, charter school educators at St. HOPE Public Schools have successfully ousted Sacramento City Teachers Association (SCTA) union officials from the school system.
Rather than face a union decertification vote that a federal labor board had scheduled to take place on March 11, SCTA union bosses instead disclaimed interest in maintaining their exclusive representation powers over the St. HOPE educators. Now, over 50 teachers from PS7 Elementary School, PS7 Middle School, and Sacramento Charter High School are free of the unwanted union’s control.
St. HOPE teacher Beth Simonton led the removal effort, submitting a petition to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in January requesting a vote to remove the union. The NLRB is the agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law, a task that includes administering votes to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Private organizations like St. HOPE, even if they operate public charter schools, are often subject to federal labor law as opposed to state labor laws.
Simonton’s petition, which she submitted in January with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, contained signatures from the majority of her colleagues – well over the threshold needed under federal law to trigger a union decertification vote. On February 25, NLRB Region 20 rejected arguments by the union and ordered a union decertification election to take place among the St. HOPE educators.
Then, only days before the scheduled election, SCTA union officials sent correspondence announcing that they were ending their monopoly bargaining control over the facility, likely in an attempt to avoid an embarrassing lopsided loss at the ballot box. St. HOPE teachers are now free of SCTA union bosses’ power to dictate their contract terms and work rules.
“I’m truly grateful that my colleagues and I were able to band together and send SCTA union officials on their way,” commented Simonton. “So much of their activity at St. HOPE involved pitting teachers against each other and finding ways to bend the rules so they could maintain their control. They did not represent the interest of the educators at St. HOPE, and we look forward to being independent from the union. We are FAMILY!”
NLRB Order: CA Charter Schools Aren’t Exempt From Federal Labor Law
As litigation over the scheduled vote went on, NLRB Region 20 notably rejected arguments from SCTA union lawyers that the St. HOPE system is a “political subdivision” subject to the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) and not the NLRB. Union officials prefer operating under the PERB, where rules are rigged against workers seeking decertification, effectively letting union legal tactics trap employees in union ranks for years even when a majority is on record as wanting the union removed.
In rejecting the union’s argument, NLRB officials turned to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Natural Gas Utility District of Hawkins County v. NLRB, under which an employer is a “political subdivision” only if it was directly created by the state, or if it is administered by individuals who are accountable to the public or public officials.
Applying this standard, NLRB Region 20 found that a private individual founded St. HOPE, and that public officials have little, if any, control over St. HOPE’s board of directors. For those reasons, the Regional Director ruled that “[St. HOPE] is an employer within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the [National Labor Relations Act] and is not exempt under the test set forth in Hawkins County.”
While SCTA union officials fled St. HOPE Public Schools before the NLRB-ordered vote could take place, NLRB Region 20’s ruling could be significant going forward for employees of other California charter schools who wish to decertify unions in their workplaces. Foundation attorneys have helped charter school employees in a number of other states in efforts at the NLRB to remove unwanted unions, including in Missouri and New York.
CA Charter School Teachers Have More Options to Escape Unions
“Ms. Simonton and her fellow St. HOPE educators should be commended for their success in breaking free from SCTA union officials,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But their effort – which also included attempts years ago to vote SCTA out – exposes how focused California labor law is on solidifying union boss power, even in the face of clear evidence that workers want a union gone.
“Bureaucrats on the California PERB blocked the St. HOPE teachers from ousting the union for years on end, simply because SCTA union bosses filed unsubstantiated charges of employer misconduct,” Mix added. “These charades forced Simonton and her coworkers to resort to an entirely different agency in the hopes of finally making their voices heard.
“No workers should have to face challenges like this simply to vote a union out,” Mix continued. “But, following St. HOPE educators’ success, charter school educators across the Golden State should know they have more options for seeking a union decertification election, and should not hesitate in contacting Foundation attorneys if they want to exercise this important right.”
National Labor Relations Board Schedules Vote for St. HOPE Charter School Teachers Seeking to Remove SCTA Union
Despite union’s legal attempt to block vote, NLRB schedules election for March 11 in response to majority-backed petition from teachers to decertify union
Sacramento, CA (March 2, 2026) – In response to a petition from the majority of St. HOPE Public Schools educators requesting such a vote, a federal labor board has ordered an election to remove Sacramento City Teachers Association (SCTA) union officials from the school system to take place on Wednesday, March 11. The vote will take place among over 50 teachers from PS7 Elementary School, PS7 Middle School, and Sacramento Charter High School.
In January, St. HOPE educator Beth Simonton submitted a petition to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), asking the federal agency to administer a vote to end SCTA union bosses’ exclusive representation powers over her and her colleagues. The NLRB is the agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law, a task that includes administering votes to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Private organizations like St. HOPE that operate public charter schools are generally subject to federal labor law.
Simonton’s petition, which she submitted with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, contained signatures from the majority of her colleagues – well over the threshold needed under federal law to trigger a union decertification vote. Following a hearing conducted January 26-28, NLRB Region 20 issued an order on February 25 ordering an election to be held.
“SCTA union officials have been extremely divisive and have not had a positive impact on teachers, students, or the St. HOPE community as a whole,” commented Simonton. “They’ve spent much more time trying to demonize school leadership than simply standing up for our interests. I’m proud to represent the majority of educators at St. HOPE who are standing up and saying ‘enough is enough.’”
NLRB Rejects Union Argument That St. HOPE is Exempt From Federal Labor Law
NLRB Region 20’s election order notably rejected arguments from SCTA union lawyers that the St. HOPE system is actually a “political subdivision” under the jurisdiction of California’s Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) and not subject to the NLRB. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Natural Gas Utility District of Hawkins County v. NLRB that an employer qualifies as such a “political subdivision” only if it was directly created by the state, or if it is administered by individuals who are accountable to the public or public officials.
The election order points out that a private individual founded St. HOPE and that public officials have little, if any, control over St. HOPE’s board of directors. “I find that [St. HOPE] is an employer within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the [National Labor Relations Act] and is not exempt under the test set forth in Hawkins County,” the NLRB Regional Director’s decision reads. “Accordingly, I am directing an election among the employees in the agreed upon appropriate unit.”
The Foundation has aided numerous charter school employees over the years in opposing unwanted union hierarchies. Elsewhere in California, charter school teachers at Gompers Preparatory Academy in San Diego sought Foundation aid in obtaining a vote to remove San Diego Education Association (SDEA) union officials from the school. After two such efforts to remove the union (one in 2019 and another in 2023) and much litigation over SDEA union bosses’ delay tactics, the educators finally voted the SDEA out in 2023.
“We at the Foundation are proud to assist St. HOPE educators in finally getting a chance to exercise their right to vote SCTA union officials out of power at their schools,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But it’s ridiculous that it took a herculean effort and several years for St. HOPE teachers just to get to this point. Biased bureaucrats at the California PERB blocked them from having a union removal vote for several years based on dubious allegations of employer misconduct – and St. HOPE educators are hardly the only workers in California that PERB has subjected to such stonewalling.
“We hope that Ms. Simonton’s effort is not only the first step in St. HOPE educators freeing themselves from SCTA union chiefs, but also the first step toward freeing California educators from the oppressive California labor bureaucracy,” Mix added.
Veolia Environmental Services Employee Slams Teamsters With Federal Charges for Illegal Termination Threats
Worker maintains that Teamsters Local 63 officials threatened to have her fired for not joining the union and refusing to pay for union politics
Colton, CA (February 2, 2026) – An employee of medical waste management firm Veolia Environmental Services has just hit Teamsters Local 63 union officials with federal charges, maintaining that union officials threatened to have her fired for refusing to join the union. The employee, Alexus Villanueva, also charges Teamsters bosses with unlawfully forcing her to pay full union dues, including dues for union political activities, via paycheck deduction.
Villanueva filed her charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law in the private sector. Under federal labor law and Supreme Court decisions like NLRB v. General Motors, union officials cannot enforce contracts that mandate formal union membership as a condition of employment. Furthermore, the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision bars union bosses from compelling workers to pay for “nonchargeable” union expenses, like the union’s political or ideological doings.
California lacks Right to Work protections for its workers, meaning that union chiefs can force workers under their control to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs. In contrast, in Right to Work states like neighboring Nevada and Arizona, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary for workers.
Teamsters Union Officials Blatantly Ignore Federal Labor Law
According to Villanueva’s charges, Teamsters Local 63 officials threatened to have her fired if she didn’t join the union and authorize the deduction of union dues from her paychecks. Federal law forbids union officials from requiring workers to pay union dues by direct deductions from their paychecks.
Villanueva’s charges also detail that Teamsters bosses violated other elements of the Beck decision, including by “fail[ing] to provide her with…a notice of the calculation of the amount of non-chargeable fees verified by an independent certified public accountant” and “an opportunity to challenge its calculation and have it reviewed by an impartial decisionmaker.”
Case Follows String of Actions by SoCal Workers Against Teamsters Local 63
In recent years, Foundation attorneys have helped numerous other workers in Southern California challenge Teamsters Local 63 union officials. In 2024, Dependable Highway Express driver John Cwiek slammed the union with charges after he faced retaliation for revealing publicly available data about Teamsters bosses’ salaries. Cwiek and his coworkers later sought a “decertification vote” with free Foundation aid and successfully forced the union out of their workplace. Foundation attorneys also aided Ozvaldo Gutierrez and his Los Angeles-based XPO Logistics colleagues in removing Teamsters Local 63 from power in 2021.
“Instead of seeking to win workers over voluntarily, Teamsters Local 63 union bosses continue to flout federal labor law in pursuit of more control and more dues money,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But worker opposition to Teamsters control is not limited just to Southern California – recent NLRB statistics suggest that no union faces more employee-backed removal attempts than the Teamsters.
“While it’s especially heinous that Teamsters officials are attempting to get Ms. Villanueva fired for refusing to pay for union political activity, ultimately no worker should be forced to subsidize any part of union bosses’ agenda just to keep their job,” Mix added.
Sacramento St. Hope Educators Ask Federal Labor Board to Hold Vote to Eject SCTA Union Officials
Majority of St. Hope teachers support union decertification vote, petition submitted to National Labor Relations Board
Sacramento, CA (January 14, 2026) – A majority of educators for charter school operator St. HOPE Public Schools are requesting a vote to end Sacramento City Teachers Association (SCTA) union officials’ bargaining power over their schools. SCTA is an affiliate of both the California Teachers Association (CTA) and National Education Association (NEA).
St. HOPE educator Beth Simonton filed a petition backed by the majority of her coworkers late last week, requesting the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) hold a union removal vote among St. HOPE teachers. Simonton is receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The NLRB is the agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, a task that includes administering votes to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. The work unit covered by the petition includes over 50 teachers from PS7 Elementary School, PS7 Middle School, and Sacramento Charter High School.
The SCTA first gained monopoly bargaining power over the charter system in 2018. St. HOPE teachers petitioned for a union decertification vote in 2021, but SCTA union officials were able to manipulate allegations of employer misconduct to scuttle it.
CTA Union Officials Cause Division in Sacramento Schools and Other CA Schools
“SCTA union officials have been extremely divisive and have not had a positive impact on teachers, students, or the St. HOPE community as a whole,” commented Simonton. “They’ve spent much more time trying to demonize school leadership than simply standing up for our interests. I’m proud to represent the majority of educators at St. HOPE who are standing up and saying ‘enough is enough.’”
St. HOPE Public Schools operates public charter schools within the Sacramento City Unified School District (SCUSD). In the past, California’s public schools have been subject to state labor boards and regulations. However, the Supreme Court’s ruling in NLRB v. Natural Gas Utility District of Hawkins County strongly suggests that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) covers charter school operators like St. HOPE within its definition of “employers” subject to the NLRB’s authority.
The Foundation has aided numerous charter school employees over the years in opposing unwanted union hierarchies. Elsewhere in California, charter school teachers at Gompers Preparatory Academy in San Diego sought Foundation aid in obtaining a vote to remove San Diego Education Association (SDEA) union officials from the school. After two such efforts (one in 2019 and another in 2023) and much litigation over union delay tactics, the educators finally voted the SDEA out in 2023.
Educators Seek Escape from Teacher Union and California Labor Bureaucracy
“St. HOPE educators serve some of Sacramento’s most underprivileged young people, and they deserve to have their voices in the workplace heard,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “California’s legislature and administrative state are deep in the pockets of CTA teacher union bosses, who overwhelmingly seek to further their own interests and power over the rights of educators themselves.
“We at the Foundation hope that Ms. Simonton and her colleagues’ effort to break free of both CTA union officials and the onerous California labor bureaucracy is just the first step in achieving greater freedom for charter school educators across the Golden State,” commented Mix.
Workers in North Carolina and California Ask Federal Labor Board to Nix Policy Letting Union Bosses Block Elections
With new quorum, National Labor Relations Board can eliminate “blocking charge” policy used to stop union removal elections
Washington, DC (January 6, 2026) – Workers in North Carolina and California are pushing the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to strike down its “blocking charge” policy, which is preventing them from removing unwanted union officials from their workplaces.
The workers, which include miners employed by The Quartz Corp. in Spruce Pine, NC, and Fresno, CA-based construction materials workers for CalPortland, both backed petitions in late 2025 asking the NLRB to administer votes to remove (or “decertify”) unions from their workplaces. Despite both petitions containing enough signatures to trigger union decertification elections, regional NLRB officials blocked both votes pursuant to the NLRB’s current blocking charge policy. This Biden-era policy permits union officials to stymie the union decertification process simply by filing unproven or unrelated “unfair labor practice” charges at the NLRB alleging employer misconduct.
Quartz Corp. employee Blake Davis and CalPortland worker Darrell Dunlap have both submitted Requests for Review to the NLRB in Washington, DC. These filings ask the Board to overturn the blocking charge policy and let their coworkers’ requested votes to remove the United Mine Workers and Teamsters unions (respectively) go forward. Davis and Dunlap are both receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys. While vacancies on the NLRB have caused a backlog of cases, the U.S. Senate recently approved two new presidential appointees to the NLRB, meaning the Board now has a “quorum” and can hear these and other cases.
“Blocking Charge” Policy Inconsistent With Federal Labor Law
Dunlap’s Request for Review argues that the NLRB’s blocking charge policy directly conflicts with the text of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law that the NLRB is responsible for enforcing. “Allowing a self-interested party to unilaterally block elections conflicts with [the NLRA], which requires the Board to hold an election” if employees submit a valid decertification petition, Dunlap’s brief says. “The blocking charge policy does not just contravene a clear Congressional command, but also offends the entire structure and purpose of the Act: employee free choice.”
Dunlap’s brief also maintains that the blocking charge rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because it is arbitrary and fails to accomplish even its own stated goals. For example, the Request for Review says, NLRB bureaucrats impose the policy without considering key data showing the blocking charge policy has caused substantial delays in the union election process. Furthermore, the Board has argued that the rule is required to stop “coercive elections” from happening – even though its only mechanism for doing this is giving self-interested union bosses massive power to block elections or let them proceed.
Davis’ Request for Review makes many similar arguments, but adds that even if the Board were to uphold the blocking charge policy, regional NLRB officials egregiously misapplied it in his case. As his brief points out, even before he and his colleagues had submitted the union decertification petition, “the union filed a barrage of [unfair labor practice charges],” some of which were just speculation about employer activity aiding the union removal process. Even so, the regional NLRB appears to have blocked Davis and his coworkers’ requested election based on the mere quantity of the union’s charges, without explaining which allegation justified blocking. “By failing to distinguish between allegations that might warrant blocking and those that plainly would not, the Region reduced the rule to a numbers game,” the Request for Review says.
Trump NLRB Can Undo ‘Blocking Charge’ Policy and Empower Independent-Minded Workers
The National Right to Work Foundation has long advocated for the NLRB to return to the Election Protection Rule, which prevented many aspects of blocking charge-related gamesmanship before the Biden NLRB overturned it in 2022. Under the Election Protection Rule, allegations of misconduct related to a union decertification election could not block employees from exercising their right to vote, and in most cases permitted the immediate release of the vote tally as opposed to ordering ballots to be impounded during litigation over blocking charges.
“The NLRB’s ‘blocking charge’ policy serves only to let union officials stop the workers they claim to ‘represent’ from making a free choice about whether a union in their workplace is right for them,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Mr. Dunlap and Mr. Davis speak for countless workers across the country who are trapped under union boss dictates and forced-dues payments because of this rule.
“If President Trump’s new NLRB appointees are serious about putting American workers back in control of their own livelihoods, reversing this union boss power giveaway is an excellent place to start,” Mix added.
CalPortland Fresno Ready Mix Drivers File Petition to End Teamsters Local 431 Union Boss “Representation”
Majority of workers back petition seeking to free themselves of Teamsters union officials
Fresno, CA (October 31, 2025) – Drivers of building materials company CalPortland’s Fresno Ready Mix Plant have filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) requesting that the NLRB hold a “decertification” election to remove Teamsters Local 431 from their workplace. The drivers’ efforts are spearheaded by Darrell Dunlap Sr., who filed the petition with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act and adjudicating disputes between employers, unions, and individual employees.
Dunlap Sr.’s petition is supported by the majority of his coworkers, who also seek a secret ballot election from the NLRB to vote out the Teamsters as the drivers’ monopoly bargaining “representative.”
“This workplace has been under Teamster union control for over 20 years, so we’ve seen union officials’ actions up close for many years,” commented Dunlap Sr. “As our majority-backed petition shows, based on our extensive experience with the Teamsters, we are confident we’ll be better off without a union.”
California is one of the 24 states that lack Right to Work protections, which allows Teamsters union bosses to impose union monopoly bargaining contracts that force employees to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. By contrast, in neighboring Right to Work states like Arizona and Nevada, union membership and union financial support are strictly voluntary.
Independent-minded workers across the United States have been leading efforts to decertify Teamsters union bosses. The Foundation has seen a marked rise in requests from workers seeking legal assistance in Teamsters decertification cases.
“The rank-and-file are the most familiar with the union officials in their workplaces, and this is just the latest of a growing number of employees who have decided to exercise their right to free themselves of unwanted so-called ‘representation,’” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Given Teamsters’ bosses’ intimidation tactics or worse, it is not surprising that the Teamsters are regularly the union that faces the most worker decertification drives.”
California Nurse Adds New Claim in Federal Labor Board Case Against United Nurses Association of California
Charge: union officials illegally demanded nurse join union, plus maintain illegal policy that restricts right to cut off funding for political spending
Woodland Hills, CA (September 5, 2025) – Sarah Warthemann, a nurse at Kaiser Permanente, has just filed new charges in her ongoing case against the United Nurses Association of California (UNAC) union challenging union officials’ illegal demands that she pay full union dues or be fired. Warthemann’s charges were filed at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
Her original charges, filed in July, stated that UNAC union bosses illegally threatened her with termination of her employment at the hospital if she did not formally join the union. Now, the amended charges also challenge union policies that require nonmembers to opt-out of paying for union political and ideological activities.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and adjudicating disputes between employers, unions, and individual employees. The charges allege UNAC union bosses are violating Warthemann and all other nurses’ NLRA Section 7 right to refrain from participating in or supporting union activities.
Because California lacks Right to Work protections, UNAC union bosses can impose union monopoly bargaining contracts that force employees to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. By comparison, in neighboring Right to Work states like Arizona and Nevada, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
However, under Communications Workers of America v. Beck, a landmark Foundation-won Supreme Court case, even where forced dues are authorized, union officials cannot compel workers to fund activities unrelated to union bargaining, like union political activities. The charges note that UNAC officials have “repeatedly demanded payment from [Warthemann] for non-chargeable political and ideological expenditures without [her] affirmative consent” and argue that these demands represent illegal coercion under the NLRA.
“As the facts of this case demonstrate, the NLRB needs to step up to protect workers from being trapped into paying full union dues, including the portion used for union political activism,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Union bosses are not above the law, they cannot be permitted to threaten and bully workers into paying dues that go towards union political activities that many workers find objectionable.”
San Fernando Valley Kaiser Permanente Nurse Hits UNAC Union With Federal Charges for Forcing Nurses to Fund Union Politics
UNAC union officials stated she would be fired if she refused formal union membership and dues payments for political expenditures
Los Angeles, CA (July 18, 2025) – Sarah Warthemann, a nurse at Kaiser Permanente’s branch in Woodland Hills, has just filed federal charges against the United Nurses Association of California (UNAC) union at her workplace. She maintains that UNAC officials threatened that she would lose her job if she did not formally join the union, and have ignored her attempt to exercise her legal right to opt out of paying for union political expenses. Warthemann filed her charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, a task that includes adjudicating labor disputes between employers, union officials, and individual employees. Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects workers’ right to refrain from participating in or supporting union activities.
Warthemann’s charge concerns her rights under CWA Union v. Beck, a Foundation-won case in which the Supreme Court ruled union bosses could not require those abstaining from union membership to fund union ideological activities just to keep their jobs. The General Motors v. NLRB Supreme Court decision also forbids union officials from requiring formal membership as a condition of employment.
Because California is not a Right to Work state, UNAC chiefs can enforce union monopoly bargaining contracts that require Warthemann and her fellow nurses to pay union dues to keep their jobs, but Beck limits this amount to only the portion of dues that UNAC officials use for bargaining functions. In contrast, in Right to Work states like neighboring Arizona and Nevada, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
“The radical political agenda promoted by the UNAC union is something I do not—and should not—be compelled to support,” Warthemann commented. “While I’m required to pay union dues to remain employed at the hospital, that obligation should not include funding extreme political activities. It is both unethical and, in my view, illegal.”
UNAC Union Bosses Snub Both Federal Law and Recent Settlement
Warthemann reports in her charges that a UNAC representative emailed her a union membership form in June, insisting that she “fill this out ASAP. It is a condition of employment.” Warthemann also notes that UNAC bosses have been ignoring her request to exercise her rights under Beck, and have persisted in demanding she pay full union dues. According to the charges, the union flouted other requirements mandated by the Beck decision – including that union officials provide nonmember employees with a financial breakdown of how the union spends employees’ money.
The UNAC union’s failure to follow Beck is especially flagrant in light of an NLRB-approved settlement union bosses recently reached with another Kaiser Permanente Woodland Hills nurse, Jillian Clausi. Clausi also accused the union of Beck violations, and the settlement in her case contains declarations by the union that it will “not charge Beck objectors the full amount of union membership dues,” among other things. This appears to be exactly the misbehavior Warthemann is describing in her new charge.
“It’s no surprise that UNAC union officials – who spent millions of dollars to influence the 2024 California elections – are trying to keep nurses in the dark about their right to stop their money from enriching the union’s political machine,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But workers’ right to say ‘no’ to funding union boss agendas shouldn’t be limited to just politics. No worker should be forced to fund a union hierarchy that has been abrasive or just flat out incompetent while claiming to ‘represent’ workers.
“Ms. Warthemann’s case is Exhibit A in why all American workers deserve Right to Work protections. Union officials must rely on voluntarism – not government-backed force – to gain worker support,” Mix added.
Hundreds of OH Workers Exit Teamsters as Union Bosses’ Amazon ‘Strike’ Stunt Flounders
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, March/April 2025 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Teamsters O’Brien tried to take away Christmas cheer, but couldn’t take away Ohio workers’ freedom
Daniel Caughhorn led a scrappy group of his coworkers in voting Teamsters bosses out of their workplace, a scrap metal processing facility in Toledo, OH. They also beat back union bosses’ attempts to overturn their vote.
WASHINGTON, DC – This past December, Teamsters President Sean O’Brien announced the “largest-ever strike against Amazon,” claiming that thousands of workers would heed his strike order, abandon their delivery vehicles and hit the picket lines. O’Brien threatened that Christmas gifts would be delayed unless his demands were met.
Those who took O’Brien’s rhetoric at face value would have thought he was a veritable Grinch stealing Christmas (even though he tried to explain it was Amazon’s fault that the strike had to occur). But even reporting from pro-Big Labor outlets soon revealed that the order was more story than substance: According to Labor Notes, only about 600 employees obeyed the strike order despite Teamsters honchos claiming to “represent” some 7,000 to 10,000 Amazon employees.
Even the small number who did cease work on O’Brien’s command are arguably not employees of Amazon, and likely aren’t under Teamsters control at all: They work primarily for independent contractors that carry out some delivery functions for Amazon. Even if O’Brien’s dubious theory claiming he had control over those delivery drivers was correct, it would have only affected 10 out of the roughly 110 Amazon centers nationwide. Still, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys put a special legal notice out to delivery drivers nationwide informing them of their rights if they were illegally coerced to strike.
Workers Defeat Cynical Attempt by Teamsters to Overturn Vote
The December 2024 Teamsters “strike” against Amazon may go down in history as a strained publicity stunt. But the more significant Teamsters news that month was that hundreds of Foundation-backed workers across Northern Ohio took real action by voting to free themselves from unwanted Teamsters officials’ so-called “representation.”
Dusty Hinkle, an employee for Frito-Lay’s plant in Wooster, OH, and Daniel Caughhorn, a worker at scrap metal firm Omnisource’s facility in Toledo, OH, paved the way to freedom for their coworkers by submitting petitions asking the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to hold votes among their coworkers to remove or “decertify” Teamsters unions at their facilities. They submitted these in October and August 2024, respectively, with free Foundation legal assistance.
Because Ohio lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, Teamsters officials enforced contracts that required Hinkle, Caughhorn, and their colleagues to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs. In contrast, in Right to Work states, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
The NLRB, the federal agency that enforces federal labor law, administered decertification votes at Hinkle’s and Caughhorn’s workplaces after finding that both petitions contained enough employee signatures to trigger a vote under agency rules. Even though clear majorities of workers voted against Teamsters union control in both votes, Teamsters union officials filed objections alleging misconduct by Frito-Lay and Omnisource management in an attempt to overturn the election results.
However, in both cases regional NLRB officials tossed the union objections and certified the workers’ votes. The Omnisource and Frito-Lay employees — over 430 in total — thereby cut all ties with the Teamsters unions. Now both sets of employees are free both of union bosses’ forced-dues demands and their ability to impose one-size-fits-all contracts on the workplace.
In the final months of 2024, Foundation attorneys assisted a number of other workers from across industries with efforts to remove unwanted Teamsters officials. From just October to December 2024, truck drivers from Georgia, California, Virginia, and New Jersey successfully booted out Teamsters union officials or initiated removal efforts with Foundation aid. These cases came despite increasingly hostile rulemaking from the outgoing Biden Administration’s NLRB bureaucrats in 2024, which undid key Foundation-backed reforms that made it easier for workers to request decertification elections.
Teamsters Schemes to Steal Christmas and Workers’ Rights Both Failed
“Sean O’Brien’s Christmas publicity stunt might have made him seem like an attempted stealer of gifts and holiday cheer, but these two Foundation cases from Ohio demonstrate what Teamsters bosses really are: stealers of workers’ rights and freedom,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens.
“That Teamsters officials in both these cases attempted to disenfranchise workers who opposed them shows why workers are turning against their power-hungry tactics, and why American workers deserve the Right to Work choice to withhold financial support from union officials who aren’t serving their interests.”
Farmworkers in NY and CA File Federal Challenges Against Statutes Letting Union Bosses Seize Control Without Employee Vote
Workers contend that “card check” unionization method leads to false claims of majority union support, intimidation, and constitutional violations
Washington, DC (May 27, 2025) – Agricultural workers from New York and California have just filed federal complaints to challenge laws in both states that permit United Farm Workers (UFW) union officials to force them under union control using highly suspect tactics. Both sets of workers are receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
In New York, farmworkers Ricardo Bell and Jean Fenel Estrame, who work for Porpiglia Farms in Marlboro and Cherry Lawn Farms in Sodus respectively, are challenging the so-called Farm Laborers’ Fair Labor Practices Act (FLFLPA). In California, Wonderful Nurseries employees Claudia Chavez, Maria Gutierrez, and 18 others are challenging portions of the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA).
The New York agricultural employees are challenging the FLFLPA because, among other things, it lets union officials sweep to power through the coercive “card check” unionization method. The California farmworkers assert that the ALRA forces employees and employers alike to accept government-mandated union contracts after such coercion has occurred, and challenge card check itself in a similar state court case.
The card check process lacks the security of a secret ballot vote, and exposes workers to intimidation and manipulation from union officials who seek to collect enough cards to claim “majority support” among workers. Under the rules of both California’s Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) and New York’s Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), a union that presents the agency with cards obtained from a majority of workers immediately gains certification as the workers’ monopoly bargaining agent.
Charges of improper behavior in obtaining this status, including union lies and coercion while collecting cards, can only be dealt with after the union is certified – if at all. Further, under both statutes, certification starts a countdown to a government-imposed union contract that can trap workers in union ranks for years.
Even worse, Bell and Estrame’s complaint argues that New York’s FLFLPA violates the U.S. Constitution because it lacks basic provisions to guard workers from union boss malfeasance. The statute “does not require that unions fairly represent employees, does not give employees a right to refrain from union activity, and does not give employees a right to file unfair labor practice charges against a union,” the complaint says.
In the Wonderful Nurseries case, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California permitted the 20 employees to intervene in a lawsuit against the ALRB. The employees’ current complaint was then filed on May 19. Meanwhile, in New York, Bell and Estrame filed a motion on May 21 seeking to intervene in a suit in which the New York State Vegetable Growers Association, Porpiglia Farms, and other farm operators are challenging the FLFLPA.
Workers Challenged Union’s Rise to Power Through Deceitful Techniques
Wonderful Nurseries employees sought to intervene in a case challenging UFW bosses’ card check organizing campaign at first before the ALRB, after the agency certified the union’s questionable claims of majority support. In unfair labor practice charges before the ALRB, Chavez and Gutierrez described multiple fabrications – and even discriminatory behavior – that UFW union bosses used to get employees to sign authorization cards, including “representing that certain COVID-19-related public benefits available to farmworkers required signatures on union membership cards…that union membership cards were not, in fact, union membership cards to be used in any UFW organizing efforts…presenting to strictly Spanish-speaking discriminatees union membership cards only in English…[and] presenting to illiterate discriminatees union membership cards and misrepresenting their content and/or significance.”
Complaint: NY Ag Labor Statute Also Disrupts Workers’ Immigration Status
In addition to citing issues with card check, Bell and Estrame’s complaint notes that the FLFLPA’s imposition of UFW bargaining control over them interferes with Bell’s legal status in the country under the H2-A agricultural visa program. “The inclusion of H2-A employees in the FLFLPA statutory scheme and in bargaining units certified by PERB under the statute is preempted by the federal government’s general power to regulate the field of immigration…” the complaint says. According to the complaint, that overreach by the NY statute violates the Supremacy and Contract Clauses of the U.S. Constitution.
“These farmworkers from New York and California are challenging the use of so-called ‘card check’ organizing campaigns in the agricultural sector. But they really speak for countless workers across industries who have faced intimidation, harassment, and other rights violations during card check campaigns just so union officials can seize bargaining control over them and collect dues,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Workers everywhere in the country should have the right to vote in a secure secret ballot election on whether they want a union. And, just as importantly, they should have a right to refrain from union activity and challenge union boss misdeeds if a union they oppose does gain control over them. Card check is a process designed to trample workers’ individual rights.”
