Reed & Perrine Lawn Products Workers Escape Union After Fighting Frivolous Union Delay Tactics
After workers requested union removal vote in 2024, union bosses blocked the vote for a year and a half using specious allegations
Manalapan Township, NJ (April 22, 2026) – After a year-and-a-half delay caused by frivolous union legal tactics, employees at Reed & Perrine Lawn Products (a division of The Andersons, Nasdaq: ANDE) have finally succeeded in removing United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 152 union officials from power at their workplace. Reed & Perrine employee Christine Bradach kicked off the effort among her coworkers to remove the UFCW union in November 2024 when she filed a decertification petition at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Bradach received free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in filing her petition.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law, a task that includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Bradach’s petition contained employee signatures well in excess of the threshold required to prompt the NLRB to hold a decertification election. Bradach’s work unit includes production department and shipping department employees at Reed & Perrine Lawn Products.
Almost immediately after Bradach had filed her petition, UFCW union bosses filed so-called “blocking charges” to stop the vote from happening. Blocking charges are unproven allegations of employer misconduct that union officials file in order to delay or derail an employee-requested union decertification election. Blocking charges often have little or nothing to do with employees’ reasons for wanting to vote out a union, yet NLRB officials will frequently delay decertification elections for months or years without even holding a hearing into the charges’ veracity or connection to employee dissatisfaction.
In Bradach’s case, NLRB Region 22 blocked Bradach and her coworkers’ requested vote based on UFCW officials’ blocking charges. Almost a year and a half later, UFCW union officials withdrew the blocking charges – presumably because the NLRB communicated that it would finally dismiss them for having no merit. Immediately after NLRB Region 22 announced it would finally take up Bradach’s petition, UFCW Local 152 officials announced they were “disclaiming interest” in continuing their control over the facility – in other words, leaving the facility immediately to avoid an employee vote that would have likely ended in a lopsided loss for the union.
UFCW Union Officials Continued to Take Dues While Blocking Removal Vote
New Jersey lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector employees. This means UFCW union officials had the power to enforce contracts that required Reed & Perrine employees to pay money to the union or be fired. In contrast, in states that have Right to Work laws, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
“My colleagues and I had had it with the UFCW, but they stuck around in the workplace after we made it clear we no longer wanted the union,” commented Bradach. “It’s a farce for them to claim they ‘represented’ us, especially when they were actively trying to block us from just having a vote on whether we wanted to continue with the union. My colleagues and I are glad we’re finally free.”
Trump NLRB Urged to Eliminate ‘Blocking Charge’ Policy
The Foundation has pressed the NLRB for years to end its non-statutory blocking charge policy. The Foundation has instead advocated for a 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. In most cases, the Rule permitted the immediate release of the vote tally as opposed to ordering ballots to be impounded during litigation over blocking charges.
“As Ms. Bradach’s case shows all too well, the ‘blocking charge’ policy just incentivizes union officials to act cynically and opportunistically while the rights of the workers they claim to ‘represent’ suffer,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “An approach that is more protective of workers’ rights is found in the Election Protection Rule, which mandates that allegations over interference be dealt with after employees have had a chance to exercise their right to vote.
“The Trump NLRB should work quickly to protect workers’ freedom of choice from restrictive and unreasonable doctrines like the ‘blocking charge’ policy, which serve only to empower union special interests to the detriment of the rights of rank-and-file workers,” added Mix.
Cannabis Workers Send UFCW Union Packing at Holistic Industries Monson Facility
Majority of workers at plant requested vote to remove union, UFCW bosses fled facility after attempts to block the vote failed
Springfield, MA (February 25, 2026) – Packaging associates and delivery drivers at cannabis company Holistic Industries’ Monson plant have successfully removed United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union officials from their workplace. The victory comes after a majority of Holistic employees backed a petition asking the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to administer a vote to remove the UFCW union from the facility (also known as a union “decertification” vote).
Scott Browne, a Holistic packaging associate, submitted the petition with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law, a task that includes holding votes to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions.
Rather than face a potentially lopsided loss at the ballot box, UFCW union officials instead submitted correspondence February 20 disclaiming interest in continuing their exclusive “representation” powers over the Holistic Industries workers.
Because Massachusetts lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, UFCW officials were empowered to require Browne and his colleagues to pay union dues or fees as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In contrast, in Right to Work states, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary and the choice of each individual worker.
However, in both Right to Work and non-Right to Work states, union bosses’ government-granted exclusive representation powers let them control the working conditions of all workers in a unionized workplace, even those who voted against or otherwise oppose the union. Browne and his colleagues are now free from UFCW bosses’ forced-dues demands and exclusive representation powers.
UFCW Union Officials Filed Specious Charges to Block Ouster Vote
Browne’s petition, which he submitted in June 2025, contained employee signatures well in excess of the necessary threshold to trigger the decertification election, but UFCW union officials filed so-called “blocking charges” with the NLRB in July 2025 in an attempt to block the vote and cling to power.
Regional NLRB officials blocked the vote for months at union bosses’ behest. Foundation attorneys filed a Request for Review with the NLRB in Washington, DC, arguing that the NLRB’s current policy surrounding blocking charges allows unsubstantiated and unrelated claims of employer interference – like those in the charges UFCW chiefs filed – to block workers’ right to vote on a union. The filing requested that the blocking charge policy be overturned.
“The blocking charge policy allows the Board to arbitrarily refuse to process an election, which undermines employees’ statutory rights and free choice,” Browne’s Request for Review read.
However, after litigation between Holistic Industries management and UFCW officials over the blocking charges wrapped up this month, UFCW union bosses disclaimed interest in Browne’s unit, likely aware that they would not win the decertification election.
“We at the Foundation are proud to have helped Mr. Browne and his colleagues escape the monopoly power of UFCW union officials,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But there’s no reason that UFCW bosses should have been able to delay this result for the better part of a year.”
“The current NLRB’s ‘blocking charge’ rules, created during the Biden-era NLRB, allow union officials to use unsubstantiated and unrelated claims of so-called unfair labor practices to trap workers in union ranks,” added Mix. “Trump’s new appointees to the NLRB must work swiftly to reform the agency’s standards to better protect the rights of workers to remove unions as they wish.”
Ontario, CA-Based Dependable Highway Express Employees Force Out Teamsters Local 63 Union Officials
Tension escalated between workers and union after Teamsters officials threatened termination of worker who revealed union boss salaries
Ontario, CA (April 2, 2024) – Following a majority-backed petition to remove the Teamsters union, employees at Los Angeles-based transportation company Dependable Highway Express have successfully ousted Teamsters Local 63 union officials from their workplace. John Cwiek, the employee who led his coworkers in the effort to remove the union, received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Cwiek filed a union decertification petition in March, asking the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to hold a vote at his workplace to determine if the Teamsters union should continue its control over Dependable Highway Express employees. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, which includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions.
Cwiek’s petition contained signatures from a nearly 2-1 majority of employees at Dependable Highway Express’ Ontario location, far more than the 30% needed to trigger a vote under NLRB rules. However, before the NLRB could hold a decertification vote, Teamsters officials filed a “disclaimer of interest” announcing they were ending their “representation” of the work unit.
Because California lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, Teamsters union officials had the power to force Cwiek and his colleagues to pay fees to the union as a condition of keeping their jobs. In Right to Work states, in contrast, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary. Following the disclaimer, Cwiek and his coworkers are now free of the union’s forced-dues demands and its control over their working conditions.
Ontario Trucking Employee Faced Retaliation for Revealing Union Boss Salaries
Prior to their ouster, Teamsters union officials stirred tension in the workplace by threatening Cwiek, who in January sent letters to his coworkers containing publicly-available Department of Labor data on Teamsters bosses’ salaries. In retaliation for Cwiek sending the letters, a union official appeared at Cwiek’s workplace the next day, made accusations against him, and threatened that Cwiek wouldn’t be working at Dependable Highway Express by the next contract period.
These types of threats are illegal under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which protects employee speech critical of union officials, and protects employees’ right to refrain from union activities if they so choose. With Foundation aid, Cwiek separately filed federal charges against Teamsters Local 63 in February over this behavior. That charge was dropped in light of the union’s disclaimer of interest, and Cwiek remains employed at Dependable Highway Express.
“I am deeply troubled by the blatant retaliatory actions taken by officials at Teamsters Local 63 in response to expressing the views of myself and several other hard-working drivers at Dependable Highway Express,” Cwiek commented at the time. “We will not be deterred by their bullying tactics and the baseless accusations they levy against myself and others.
“I hope that the actions of the officials from Teamsters Local 63 serve as a clear example to my colleagues that the union cannot dispute the facts of their incompetence in representing us, so they must resort to intimidation and slanderous accusations,” Cwiek added. “We will remain steadfast in our pursuit of a better future for ourselves and our families.”
SoCal Teamsters Officials Have Penchant for Threatening Workers
National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys are currently helping other transportation industry employees in Southern California oppose unwanted Teamsters union influence. The NLRB recently issued a complaint against Teamsters Local 848 union officials at Savage Services’ Long Beach facility, where employee Victor Avila filed federal charges against union bosses for threatening him and his coworkers with violence for not supporting the union. The complaint begins the NLRB’s formal prosecution of the union for its malfeasance.
“Mr. Cwiek’s battle and the struggles of other transportation workers across Southern California show exactly why Right to Work protections are so necessary,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “While it’s illegal to threaten workers for opposing the union or merely revealing truthful information, workers should never be forced to pay a union hierarchy that perpetrates such threats. On a more fundamental level, however, the choice should be completely with individual workers as to whether union officials have earned a cut of their hard-earned paychecks.”
