6 May 2024

Puerto Rico Union Bosses Try to Dodge Consequences of Janus Lawsuit

Posted in Newsletter Articles

The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, January/February 2024 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.

Worker still battling scofflaw union officials who tried to saddle him with restraining order

PRASA employee Reynaldo Cruz didn’t back down after UIA union officials tried to foist a specious restraining order on him. He isn’t backing down in the face of UIA union officials’ Janus violations either.

SAN JUAN, PR – When Reynaldo Cruz, an employee of the Puerto Rican Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA), made a Facebook post referring to a chapter president of the Authentic Independent Union of Water and Sewer Authority Employees (UIA) as “lazy,” the chapter president tried to hit him with a restraining order.

“A UIA union official targeted me with a restraining order for daring to speak out against the union, which is my free speech right,” commented Cruz. “That’s ridiculous coming
from union officials who claim to ‘represent’ me and my coworkers.”

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in October 2023 defeated the UIA official’s specious argument that the court should issue a restraining order against Cruz because he
would have had to “stalk” him to know of his laziness. But Cruz’s battle against the UIA union is far from over.

District Court Refuses to Crack Down on Obvious Janus Violations

Cruz is currently challenging a decision by the District Court of Puerto Rico in his years-long case to reclaim dues money that UIA union officials took unconstitutionally from his paycheck.

The District Court made the puzzling move of dismissing Cruz’s suit as “moot” after UIA officials deposited money due to Cruz with the Clerk of the District Court of Puerto Rico. In his motion to alter and amend the judgment, Cruz argues that because the court has not decided any of his underlying claims or entered a judgment in his favor, he has no entitlement to and cannot seek or obtain that money. Cruz is also appealing the District Court’s dismissal of his suit to the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, MA.

“Until the Court enters a declaratory judgment for Cruz, Cruz’s injury-in-fact will persist because Cruz has not received monetary relief and the Court has not entered judgment for Cruz entitling him to the UIA deposit,” Cruz’s motion reads.

Cruz argues in his suit that various provisions of the Puerto Rico Labor Relations Act, which UIA union bosses relied upon to take money from his paycheck, violate the First Amendment. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in the landmark Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME case that public employees have a First Amendment right to opt-out of dues payments to
an unwanted union, and that public employees must waive this right before any dues are deducted from their paychecks.

Cruz’s Janus lawsuit began in 2017, after UIA officials responded to his request to end his union membership and stop dues payments by telling him that he could only cut ties with the union if he left his current job. In addition to naming the UIA, Cruz’s lawsuit also names the Governor of Puerto Rico in his official capacity as Cruz is also challenging the constitutionality of Puerto Rico’s laws authorizing mandatory dues and so-called “maintenance of membership” agreements.

The Janus case was decided as Cruz’s case was ongoing. The Justices definitively ruled that requiring public sector employees to pay union dues as a condition of employment violates their First Amendment free association rights.

The Puerto Rico District Court issued its ruling on October 17, 2023. In addition to not entering a judgment for Cruz deciding his entitlement to the unconstitutionally seized money, the Court also didn’t reach a conclusion on the constitutionality of the Puerto Rico law authorizing mandatory dues payment and membership, nor did it require the UIA union to abandon anti-Janus contract provisions.

Union Bosses Must Be Made to Comply with Janus

“The ruling in Mr. Cruz’s case poses serious issues for public employees across Puerto Rico and across the country,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “If allowed to stand, it creates a precedent in which workers get no relief when union bosses seize money unconstitutionally from their hard-earned pay, and in which laws that authorize such illegal dues deductions are allowed to stand despite Janus unambiguously prohibiting them.

“Foundation staff attorneys will continue to fight for Mr. Cruz until his rights are vindicated and he gets a judgment awarding him the money he is constitutionally entitled to,” Semmens added.

24 Oct 2023

Worker Who Criticized Union Official Defeats Attempt to Slap Him with Restraining Order

Posted in News Releases

Worker also challenged unconstitutional Puerto Rico laws mandating union membership and dues payment

San Juan, PR (October 24, 2023) – A Puerto Rico Trial Court has dismissed charges from a chapter president of the Unión Independiente Auténtica De Los Empleados De La Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (UIA) that sought to foist a restraining order on Reynaldo Cruz, an employee of the Puerto Rican Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA).

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys are providing Cruz with free legal services in both this dispute and a lawsuit at the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, in which Cruz is challenging Puerto Rico laws authorizing public corporations and unions to require employees to maintain union membership and pay union dues as a condition of keeping their jobs.

Cruz argues in that ongoing, multi-year suit that various provisions of the Puerto Rico Labor Relations Act violate the First Amendment. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in the landmark Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME case that public employees have a First Amendment right to opt-out of dues payments to an unwanted union, and that public employees must waive this right before any dues are deducted from their paychecks.

In the more recent dispute over the restraining order, the UIA chapter president sought such an order against Cruz because he made Facebook posts criticizing the union’s representation of employees and the chapter president’s performance, specifically describing the chapter president as “lazy.” The union official claimed that a restraining order was necessary because Cruz would have to be stalking him to know of his “lazy” behavior. The UIA chapter president identified no evidence other than the Facebook posts themselves.

Foundation attorneys rebutted this outrageous theory. “Reynaldo Cruz’s Facebook posts are protected speech and activity that lawfully criticize and oppose the UIA President’s leadership, not ‘gestures or actions intended to intimidate, threaten, or pursue’ the union president or his family,” Cruz’s motion to dismiss reads. On October 17, 2023, a trial court judge dismissed the UIA official’s charges against Cruz.

“UIA union officials targeted me with a restraining order for daring to speak out against them, which is my free speech right,” commented Cruz. “That’s ridiculous coming from union officials who claim to ‘represent’ me and my coworkers. While I’m glad for this victory against the UIA union’s obvious retaliation, I hope that my other case helps secure workers’ rights against compulsory membership in and dues payments to unions they oppose.”

PRASA Employee Also Challenging Puerto Rico Law Authorizing Unconstitutional Compulsory Union Membership Requirements and Dues Seizures

Cruz’s lawsuit over illegal union membership and dues requirements began in 2017, after UIA officials responded to his request to end his union membership and stop dues payments by telling him that he could only disaffiliate with the union if he left his employment with PRASA or sought employment outside the UIA union’s “bargaining unit.” In addition to naming the UIA, Cruz’s lawsuit also included as a defendant the Governor of Puerto Rico in his official capacity as Cruz was also challenging the constitutionality of Puerto Rico’s laws authorizing mandatory dues and so-called “maintenance of membership” agreements.

While Cruz’s case was ongoing, the Janus case was decided, in which the Justices definitively ruled that requiring public sector employees to pay union dues as a condition of employment violates their First Amendment free association rights.

On October 17, a Puerto Rico District Court judge dubiously ruled that the case was moot. In addition to never declaring the Puerto Rico law authorizing mandatory dues payment and membership unconstitutional, the court also didn’t require the union to modify its contract to nix the provision ordering such mandatory dues deductions. Nor did the Court enter a judgment deciding Cruz’s entitlement to unconstitutionally-seized money that he demanded as part of his lawsuit. Foundation attorneys are currently considering an appeal.

“Mr. Cruz’s situation clearly shows how vindictive union officials will get if workers attempt to go against their agendas,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “It’s outrageous that UIA union officials claim to ‘represent’ workers while continuing to take dues money from Mr. Cruz in violation of his Janus rights, and while seeking to saddle him with a restraining order merely for publishing ideas critical of union bosses.”

“This conundrum demonstrates why First Amendment Janus protections are so vital: Despite often acting directly against workers’ interests, union officials will often demand worker fealty through coercive or retaliatory means,” Mix added. “Janus lets workers push back against union boss pressure by withholding their hard-earned money from union coffers.”