Estes Park Safeway Worker Slams UFCW Union with Federal Charges for Illegal Retaliatory $7,912 Strike Fine
NLRB charge: Union bosses had no legal right to impose discipline since employee resigned union membership prior to working during June 2025 strike action
Estes Park, CO (April 20, 2026) – Estes Park Safeway employee Abraham Ireland has slammed United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union officials with federal charges, maintaining that union officials hit him with a variety of illegal disciplinary actions for not participating in a June 2025 strike. Ireland, whose charges include details about UFCW union officials demanding nearly $8,000 in unlawful fines, filed his unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) 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 adjudicating labor disputes between union officials, employers, and individual employees. Federal law forbids union officials from imposing internal discipline, including fines and union trial proceedings, on workers who have exercised their right to opt out of union membership. The Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision also prohibits union officials from forcing nonmembers to pay dues for the union’s “nonchargeable” expenses, which include political or ideological activities and anything else unrelated to bargaining.
Colorado lacks Right to Work protections for its workers, meaning union officials can require every employee in a workplace to pay money to the union just to keep their jobs. However, this coercive power is limited by the Beck ruling. In contrast, in states that have Right to Work laws, such as Colorado’s neighbors Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, and Utah, union membership and all union financial support are voluntary and the choice of each individual worker.
UFCW Union Imposes Obscene Fine, Ignores Longstanding Legal Precedents
According to Ireland’s charges, on June 15, 2025, he notified the union that he resigned his membership effective immediately. Ireland also notified the union that he was exercising his Beck right to pay a reduced amount of money to the union as a nonmember from that point forward.
However, read Ireland’s charges, “on January 9, 2026, the Union refused to honor [Ireland’s] right to resign from union membership by informing him that it was processing internal union charges against him, for…crossing the picket line.” Additionally, the charges state that in March “the Union notified [Ireland] that the Union had issued a fine in the amount of $7,912.45,” despite Ireland’s valid resignation.
Ireland maintains in his charges that union officials never provided him with financial disclosures indicating how the union calculates the reduced fee amount it charges nonmembers, another requirement of the Beck Supreme Court decision.
UFCW Caught Red-Handed by Multiple Grocery Workers Around Country
Foundation-backed grocery workers in Colorado and other states have racked up a number of recent legal victories against the UFCW union, particularly challenging UFCW officials meting out strike discipline on nonmembers. In Oregon, a Fred Meyer employee’s recent federal case against UFCW Local 555 union bosses forced the union to back off a demand for nearly $1,000 in strike fines. In Centennial, Colorado, two grocery employees were similarly able to escape illegal strike fine demands (issued in connection with a King Soopers strike) this March after Foundation involvement.
“UFCW union officials are assembling an ugly track record of violating the free choice rights of grocery workers, who have the unequivocal right to end their union memberships and return to work during a union boss-ordered strike,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Luckily, Foundation attorneys have scored multiple legal victories for grocery workers, both in Colorado and beyond, who have been subjected to UFCW union officials’ illegal schemes.
“We encourage those who experienced coercion during the UFCW’s most recent wave of strikes to reach out to learn about and defend their rights with free Foundation legal aid,” added Mix.
National Right to Work Foundation Issues Legal Notice to NYC Nurses Subject to NYSNA Strike Order
As strike continues, notice reminds nurses wishing to return to work that they must resign their union memberships to avoid potentially ruinous strike fines
Washington, DC (January 22, 2026) – Today, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation issued a special legal notice for New York City-area nurses subject to New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA) union bosses’ recent strike order against five major hospitals. News reports indicate that strike activity will continue even as bargaining talks proceed.
The legal notice informs these workers of rights that union officials often do not want them to know. First and foremost, nurses have the right to resign their union memberships and keep working to support their families, thereby avoiding union fines and internal discipline.
“The situation presents serious concerns for employees who believe there is much to lose from a union-ordered strike,” the legal notice reads. “That is why workers confronted with strike demands frequently contact the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation to learn how they can avoid fines and union discipline for continuing to work during a strike to support themselves and their families.”
The notice is available at: https://www.nrtw.org/nysna/
Foundation: Resign Union Membership Before Returning to Work to Avoid Fines and Discipline
Most importantly, the notice informs nurses who want to keep working that the safest way to avoid strike fines and other punishment by union bosses is to resign union membership before returning to work. “Unions cannot fine non-members for post-resignation conduct, and union members have the legal right to resign their membership at any time,” the notice says.
The Foundation’s special legal notice provides nurses sample union resignation letters, as well as information on how to exercise their right under the CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision to opt out of paying dues for union politics. The notice also gives workers information on how to begin a petition for a “decertification election,” in which employees request a workplace election to remove the union.
“While Bernie Sanders and Zohran Mamdani use this strike as an opportunity to grandstand alongside NYSNA union officials, many rank-and-file Big Apple nurses simply want to get back to caring for their patients,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation staff attorneys are already receiving inquiries from nurses who have already been threatened by union bosses with five figure fines for refusing to strike.
“In addition to those who have already contacted Foundation attorneys, there are likely countless other nurses feeling the pressure as they face a choice between caving to union officials’ intimidation tactics or continuing to care for their patients and support their families,” added Mix. “New York City-area nurses need to know that union bosses have no legal power to require them to abandon their patients and Foundation attorneys stand ready to ensure they can fully exercise their rights.”
Pratt & Whitney Employee Slams IAM Union With Federal Charges For Imposing Illegal Post-Strike Discipline
Union officials insulted worker for wanting to resign membership and keep working, incorrectly told workers P&W was “closed shop”
Middletown, CT (October 6, 2025) – An employee of jet engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney’s Middletown facility is filing federal charges against International Association of Machinists (IAM) Local Lodge 700 union officials at the facility. The worker, Christopher Utley, is charging IAM union bosses with unlawfully imposing internal union discipline on him because he exercised his right to resign his union membership and continue working during a May strike. He also details IAM officials telling him that Pratt & Whitney is an illegal “closed shop” in which he needed to maintain union membership or be fired.
Utley filed his charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. The NLRB is the federal agency charged with enforcing federal labor law in the private sector, a task that includes adjudicating disputes between employers, union officials, and individual workers.
Federal labor law and U.S. Supreme Court decisions like NLRB v. General Motors forbid union officials from enforcing “closed shop” union contracts that require formal union membership as a condition of employment. Workers who abstain from formal union membership are immune from internal union rules and discipline regarding things like strikes.
Because Connecticut lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, however, IAM union officials can impose contract provisions that require every employee in a workplace (even those who are not union members) to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. In contrast, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary in Right to Work states.
“Instead of letting me exercise my right to leave the union and go back to work during the strike, IAM union bosses just insulted me and kept stonewalling,” commented Utley. “It’s almost like they wanted to trap me in the union just so they could subject me to internal discipline and punish me for daring to disagree with them.”
“Good Luck With That”: IAM Union Officials Ignore Resignation and Threaten Discipline on Worker
According to Utley’s charges, he called IAM Local Lodge 700 President Wayne McCarthy one day before the May strike began and informed him that he wanted to resign from the union. McCarthy “responded with various invectives, refused to identify any process to resign, said ‘good luck with that,’ and hung up the phone,” Utley’s charges say. After trying other methods of resigning, the charges read, IAM Local Lodge 700’s Vice President Chuck Hermann informed Utley that Pratt & Whitney was a “closed shop” and “he would have to be and remain a formal member of the union or face termination from his employment.”
On September 19 – months after the strike had concluded – Utley learned that IAM union bosses were “processing internal union disciplinary charges against him” for continuing to do his job during the strike. The charge argues that union officials calling Utley before a union tribunal, after he exercised his right to end union membership, violates his rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
“Instead of convincing workers to voluntarily support their agenda, IAM union officials are trying to turn Mr. Utley into an example of what happens when workers defy them,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Federal labor law unambiguously permits workers to decline formal union membership and to continue to work during union-ordered strikes. But IAM bosses misled Mr. Utley about his rights so they could attempt to subject him to their illegal retaliation.
“Foundation attorneys stand ready to provide legal aid anywhere in the country to defeat union bosses’ attempts to discipline workers for making decisions about their own livelihoods,” Mix added.
King Soopers Employees Hit Union Officials with New Federal Charges for Illegal Strike Fine Threats
Charge: UFCW Local 7 once again violating federal law with fines against non-union employees who wouldn’t abide by a union boss-ordered strike
Denver, CO (September 8, 2025) – Two King Soopers grocery workers have filed federal charges against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union in response to union officials illegally threatening to fine the workers, who chose to exercise their right to work during a strike. These cases, filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), follow a series of similar charges against UFCW union officials for issuing retaliatory fines against King Soopers employees in 2022. Both employees are receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
According to the charges, Local 7 union bosses illegally retaliated against Ryan Lamb and Lucas Martin by assessing presumptive fines and scheduling “trials” for each of them, despite the union having no authority to punish non-members. The charges note that attempts to discipline the workers for post-resignation conduct violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Union-Ordered Strikes Don’t Mean Workers Have to Stop Providing for Their Families
UFCW officials demanded that workers strike against King Soopers grocery stores for more than a week in February 2025, affecting more than 10,000 employees. In response to the high profile strike, the Foundation issued a legal notice informing the impacted workers of their rights that union officials often hide, including the right to continue working to support their families.
“Despite often-misleading language in union contracts, no employee is actually required to be a member of a union,” the notice reads. “And if an employee is not a member of a union, union officials have no power to fine or discipline him or her.”
In the cases of Lamb and Martin, both employees ensured they took the proper actions to avoid being legally subjected to internal “union discipline.” In other cases, union officials illegally attempted to issue ruinous fines against workers who declined to participate in union strike actions, with some fines reaching tens of thousands of dollars per employee.
“Union officials shouldn’t be telling me I can’t earn a living just so they can make a point,” commented Lamb. “We have the right to keep working and not abide by their rules, and it’s ridiculous that the union officials think they can punish us for exercising that right,” added Martin.
Repeat-Offender Union Has a History of Ignoring Workers’ Rights
This isn’t the first time UFCW Local 7 officials are alleged to have violated federal law. In 2022, after the UFCW ordered a strike, several employees filed charges against Local 7 officials for hitting them with fines despite being non-union members.
In two cases where the employees received free legal aid from Foundation staff attorneys, union enforcers backed down from their fines rather than face discipline from the NLRB.
“Once again UFCW bosses are demonstrating their willingness to steamroll the legal rights of rank-and-file workers, just because those workers won’t toe the union line,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Kings Soopers employees have beaten back these illegal fines in the past, and while it shouldn’t take a team of attorneys to ensure workers can exercise their legal rights, we are dedicated to ensuring all King Soopers workers can freely make the choice that is best for them.”
AT&T BellSouth Worker Slams CWA Local 3122 With Federal Charges for Imposing Illegal Discipline, Dues Demands
Post-strike, union tried to subject worker to internal union punishment despite her ending her formal union membership before the union-ordered strike
Miami, FL (February 27, 2025) – An employee of AT&T BellSouth Telecommunications has hit the Communications Workers of America (CWA) union and its affiliates with federal charges maintaining that union officials are targeting her with internal union discipline for not participating in a strike – despite the fact that she resigned her union membership beforehand.
The worker, Sofia Hernaiz, filed the unfair labor practice charge at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law and investigating and prosecuting unfair labor practices.
Hernaiz’s charge follows a strike ordered by CWA union bosses against AT&T BellSouth, which occurred August 2024. Under federal labor law, union officials can mete out internal strike discipline only on employees who are formal members of the union. A worker, like Hernaiz, who ends her union membership before exercising her right to continue working during a strike action cannot be punished by the union hierarchy.
Hernaiz also states in her charge that, in the process of revoking her membership, she additionally sent communications revoking her union dues “checkoff” authorization, which is a form that permits union bosses to deduct union dues directly from an employee’s paycheck. Despite NLRB precedent requiring the union to do so, Hernaiz’s charges say that CWA union bosses did not provide Hernaiz her dues checkoff, and also did not tell her the time intervals in which she could submit her revocation in order to make it effective. Such a scheme, often known as a “window period” or “escape period” scheme, is frequently used by union bosses to continue taking dues money from the wages of workers who have already expressed their opposition to the union.
Because of Florida’s popular Right to Work law, no worker subject to the NLRB can be forced to pay union dues or fees just to keep his or her job. This is in contrast to forced-unionism states, in which union bosses can require all employees in a workplace, even those opposed to the union, to financially support union activities or else be fired.
However, in both Right to Work and forced-unionism states, union bosses still have the power to impose their one-size-fits-all “representation” over every employee in a workplace, even over employees that voted against or otherwise oppose the union. Even in Right to Work states where legally dues payment must be voluntary, union officials frequently use dues authorization cards to attempt to trap workers in union payments.
Foundation Attorneys Helped Hundreds of AT&T Mobility Workers Escape CWA Control Last Year
Last year, Foundation attorneys helped hundreds of AT&T Mobility workers in California, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas remove CWA union officials who had subjected them to aggressive “card check” unionization campaigns. Under card check, union officials deny workers their right to vote in secret on the union and can instead pressure workers face-to-face into signing union authorization cards which are later counted as “votes.” After AT&T Mobility workers in those states had submitted valid petitions requesting union removal votes, CWA union officials abandoned each work unit before the votes could take place – likely anticipating defeats.
“CWA union officials continue to impose unpopular agendas on the workers they claim to ‘represent,’” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Ms. Hernaiz just wants to exercise her rights under Florida’s Right to Work law to end her union membership and stop financial support to the union because she opposes the union’s agenda. But CWA union officials are trying to concoct ways to punish her for not going along with the union’s strike order and keep her money flowing into union coffers against her will.
“Instead of relying on voluntary worker support to carry out their aims, CWA union officials went for illegal coercion, and our attorneys will defend Ms. Hernaiz’s rights,” Mix added.
Philly-Area Dometic Workers Win Case Against UAW for Illegal Threats During Union-Boss Ordered Strike
UAW officials unlawfully threatened to fire workers that didn’t go on strike, must now attend mandatory training on workers’ rights
Philadelphia, PA (October 16, 2024) – Seven employees of auto accessory manufacturer Dometic’s Philadelphia-area plant have triumphed over United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials in a federal case against the union for threatening illegal discipline on workers during a strike.
The favorable settlement for the Dometic workers forces UAW union officials to provide remedies not only for the illegal threats, but also for blocking workers from exercising their right to resign their memberships in the union and unlawfully demanding full union dues. The employees, Eric Angell, Robert Haldeman, Mario Coccie, Nancy Powelson, Joseph Buchak, Md Rasidul Islam, and James Nold received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
The seven employees originally filed federal Unfair Labor Practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the union following a September 2023 strike order issued by UAW officials at their workplace. The order was accompanied by statements, text messages, and even social media posts from union officials stating that employees would be disciplined or even fired if they continued to do their jobs.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law that governs private sector labor relations in the United States. Under the NLRA, American private sector workers have a right to refrain from union activity, and the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in General Motors v. NLRB the right of employees to resign union membership during a strike and continue working.
The Foundation-won settlement fully vindicates Dometic workers’ rights. It requires notices to be posted both at union offices and at Dometic’s Royersford, PA, plant detailing employees’ rights, including their right to refrain from joining a union or participating in union activities. Such information must also be shared with employees by text message. The settlement additionally requires UAW bosses to delete a Facebook post threatening workers who continued to work during the strike with being fired. Finally, the settlement orders mandatory training for union officials on a number of topics, including “a union’s right to impose internal discipline.”
Illegal Strike Threats Just Tip of Iceberg for Union Malfeasance at Dometic
All seven workers reported in their original federal charges, against the UAW, that they were informed during a September 8, 2023, union meeting that a strike would begin the following week, and any employee who refused to participate would be subject to internal union charges, fined, and ultimately terminated. The next month, each worker resigned their membership, and UAW union officials notified them that the union had started internal proceedings against them. Under federal law, union officials have no right to impose discipline on those who aren’t union members.
The charges also recounted that union officials failed to follow processes laid out by the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision. Under Beck, workers under union monopoly bargaining control who have abstained from formal membership can only be required to pay the amount of dues that the union claims goes towards bargaining, and are also entitled to receive financial information on how the union calculates the compulsory fee they charge to nonmembers as a condition of employment.
Because Pennsylvania lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector employees, union officials can impose contracts that force workers who have refrained from formal union membership to pay fees to the union or lose their jobs. However, as per Beck, this fee must exclude any money that funds a union’s political or lobbying activities, and can only include bargaining-related expenses. Beck also requires union officials to provide financial disclosures to workers who send a Beck notice.
UAW Bosses Again Caught Red-Handed Violating Employee Rights
“The UAW hierarchy, which is still under federal monitoring following a massive embezzlement probe that already resulted in a dozen union bosses’ convictions, has given workers plenty of reasons to doubt whether union officials truly have their best interests in mind,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “That was on display again at the Pennsylvania Dometic plant, where UAW officials resorted to patently illegal methods to force workers out on strike.”
“We’re proud to have helped these employees vindicate their rights, however, blatantly illegal threats like this are unfortunately common during union boss-instigated strikes,” added Mix. “That’s worth remembering as the UAW’s radical top boss Shawn Fain continues his fevered 2028 dreams of a Marxist-inspired May Day General Strike which, if it actually were to happen, would almost certainly be backed up with similar illegal threats against rank-and-file workers.”
Philly-Area Dometic Employees Slam UAW Union with Federal Charges for Illegal Threats Linked to Strike
Union steward threatened to fine and terminate any employee who chose to work during strike, seized money illegally from workers
Philadelphia, PA (March 11, 2024) – Seven employees of auto accessory manufacturer Dometic’s Philadelphia-area factory have filed federal charges against the United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 644 union, maintaining that union officials ignored their requests to resign union membership during a strike, and are now unlawfully imposing internal union discipline on them. The workers, Nancy Powelson, Eric Angell, Joseph Buchak, Mario Coccie, Md Rasidul Islam, James Nold, and Robert Haldeman, filed their charges at National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 4 with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law that governs private sector labor relations in the United States. Under the NLRA, American private sector workers have a right to refrain from union activity, and the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in General Motors v. NLRB the right of employees to resign union membership during a strike.
All seven workers report in their unfair labor practice charges that a union steward told each of them during a September 8, 2023, meeting that a strike would begin the following week and any employee who crossed the picket line during the strike would be subject to internal union charges, fined, and ultimately terminated.
In October, each of the seven employees exercised their right to resign union membership, and returned to work shortly after doing so. However, on December 10, 2023, UAW union officials notified each worker that the union had started proceedings against them and their presence would soon be required at an internal union trial.
“The Union’s act of summoning Charging Party to attend an internal Union trial for post-resignation conduct interferes, restrains and coerces Charging Party in the exercise of…[NLRA] Section 7 rights, in violation of Teamsters Local 492 (United Parcel Service)…and Section 8(b)(1),” the employees’ charges explain.
After Threatening Illegal Discipline, Union Bosses Seized Money Illegally from Workers
According to the employees’ charges, UAW union bosses’ illegal behavior continued into the new year. Between October 2023 and January 2024, each worker invoked their right under the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision, asking the UAW to reduce their dues payments to only the amount that the union claims goes toward bargaining.
Because Pennsylvania lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector employees, union officials can impose contracts that force workers who have refrained from formal union membership to pay fees to the union as a condition of employment. However, as per Beck, this fee must exclude any money that funds a union’s political or lobbying activities, and can only include bargaining-related expenses. Beck also requires union officials to provide financial disclosures to workers who send a Beck notice.
Each charge states that “the [u]nion failed to respond or provide the required [Beck] financial disclosures for itself and its affiliated unions,” which is a violation of the NLRA.
UAW Union Officials Seek to Expand Power Despite Controversies
“The UAW is a repeat offender when it comes to union officials prioritizing their own power over the freedoms and well-being of workers,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “While we’re happy to help these Pennsylvania employees of Dometic, it’s likely the case that many more workers under UAW control across the country face similar illegal threats and rights violations.
“The UAW, which was also entangled in a years-long federal probe for embezzling workers’ money as recently as 2022, is currently spending millions to attempt to expand their monopoly bargaining power over additional workers,” Mix added. “Workers targeted by UAW officials for unionization have plenty of reasons to be skeptical of the union hierarchy’s motives and should seek Foundation aid in learning about and defending their rights.”
Third King Soopers Employee Hits UFCW Union Officials with Federal Charge for Illegal Strike Fine
Following union boss-ordered January strike, nonmember workers now face thousands in ‘internal union fines’ in violation of longstanding federal law
Denver, CO (July 25, 2022) – Another King Soopers grocery worker has filed federal charges against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union in response to union officials illegally threatening to fine the worker, who chose to exercise her right to work during a strike. The case, filed with the National Labor Relations Board, is the third recently filed by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys for King Soopers employees challenging retaliatory fines by UFCW union officials.
Grocery worker Hope Schaefer has not been a union member for more than a decade, something union officials previously acknowledged in a 2011 letter. Despite this, UFCW union officials falsely accused her of working behind a picket line while still a union member during the union’s 10-day strike and threatened a fine of nearly $4,000.
UFCW officials demanded that workers strike against King Soopers grocery stores for more than a week in January 2022, impacting more than 8,000 employees. In response to the high profile strike, the Foundation issued a legal notice informing the affected workers of their rights that union officials often hide, including the right to continue to work to support their families. The notice warned workers that to protect themselves from being subjected to internal “union discipline” such as fines for defying union strike orders workers should first resign their formal union membership.
The Foundation legal notice also noted that during past UFCW-instigated strikes workers faced unlawful fines, which union officials claim can only be disputed at internal union kangaroo courts. However, with free legal aid from Foundation attorneys, many workers have successfully challenged such fines on the grounds that union bosses have no authority to levy such fines against workers who are not fully voluntary union members.
In June, Foundation staff attorneys filed NLRB charges against UFCW Local 7 after union officials similarly sought to illegally levy heavy fines against King Soopers grocery workers Nick Hall and Marcelo Ruybal despite not being voluntary union members. Reportedly UFCW union bosses have issued similar threats to numerous workers with fines of “$250 per day… as well as all monies earned … from King Soopers during [the] dates of these violations.”
“Workers should not have to choose between feeding their families and bending the knee to union bosses during UFCW-imposed strikes,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But in what has become an unfortunately predictable pattern, rather than accept limits to their unique government-granted power, UFCW union bosses are once again violating federal law to punish independent-minded workers.”
“Other King Soopers workers facing similar fines should know they can reach out to Foundation staff attorneys for free legal assistance in challenging such excessive, retaliatory fines,” added Mix.
