4 Dec 2024

Bronx KIPP Charter School Educator Hits UFT Union Bosses with Federal Charges Detailing Illegal Threats, Dues Demands

Posted in News Releases

KIPP teachers have also petitioned federal labor board for vote to remove AFT-affiliated union from school

New York, NY (December 4, 2024) – Uriel Barrera, an educator at KIPP Academy Middle School in the Bronx, has hit United Federation of Teachers Local 2 (UFT, an affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers, AFT) union officials with federal charges for illegally threatening teachers with the loss of existing benefits if they choose not to join the union, and for demanding dues payments from teachers with no legal authority to do so. Barrera filed unfair labor practice charges at National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 2 in New York 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, which governs labor relations at many charter schools, including KIPP Academy Middle School. Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) forbids union officials from restricting workers’ ability to refrain from participating in union activities if they so choose, including by making threats. The NLRA also prohibits union officials from requiring workers to pay dues unless a union monopoly bargaining agreement has been finalized with their employer.

Because New York lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, UFT union officials can seek contracts that require KIPP educators 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. But in both Right to Work and non-Right to Work jurisdictions, union officials can still force workers who oppose the union to accept one-size-fits-all union contracts.

According to Barrera’s charge, in September a UFT official sent a mass email to KIPP employees containing “threatening statements misrepresenting, among other things, that certain important benefits (that employees were already getting from their employer) were dependent upon signing a union dues deduction authorization form.” The same email also implied that union dues were mandatory despite the absence of a monopoly bargaining agreement containing a clause imposing forced union dues. Seventy-five KIPP educators are under UFT union control, according to Barrera’s filing.

“UFT union officials are misleading my fellow teachers about our legal rights and causing confusion in the workplace,” Barrera commented. “This type of disrespectful behavior is exactly why a majority of my coworkers want this union gone, and why we should be able to hold the decertification election right away.”

AFT Bosses Recently Voted Out of St. Louis KIPP School

In addition to the unfair labor practice charges, Barrera and his coworkers currently have a union decertification petition against the union pending with the NLRB. The petition, which Barrera filed in May, contains well over the number of employee signatures required by NLRB rules to trigger a “decertification election,” in which a majority of employees in a work unit can vote to remove a union.

Barrera and his coworkers are not the first KIPP educators to seek Foundation legal aid in challenging AFT union power. In St. Louis, Robin Johnston and her coworkers at KIPP St. Louis High School successfully voted to remove AFT Local 420 union officials from their school after submitting a union decertification petition with Foundation assistance. St. Louis KIPP educators complained that AFT Local 420’s divisive strike order pushed union goals at the expense of student progress and was a main reason behind the decertification effort.

“AFT officials, with the radical Randi Weingarten as their leader, are no strangers to putting union boss control and influence ahead of the wellbeing of both students and teachers,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Mr. Barrera and his coworkers at KIPP Middle School in New York are only the latest victims of AFT officials’ coercive schemes.

“Granting union bosses forced-dues and monopoly bargaining powers creates problems in any workplace, but it’s especially insidious in schools, where union bosses can hold both teachers and students hostage to their demands,” Mix added. “These threats against teachers show exactly why the NLRB should promptly schedule the decertification election to allow these teachers an up or down vote to decide whether to expel the AFT from their school.”

21 Feb 2024

Teamsters Officials Facing Federal Prosecution for Threats of Violence Against Long Beach Savage Services Employee

Posted in News Releases

Worker hit union with federal charges last year for threats of violence; latest legal action of many by employees against union

Long Beach, CA (February 21, 2024) – Following federal charges against the union from Savage Services employee Victor Avila, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a complaint against the Teamsters Local 848 union. The complaint maintains that a union agent threatened employees with violence for not supporting the union. Avila is receiving free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

After investigating and finding merit to an unfair labor practice charge, issuing a complaint is the next step in an NLRB prosecution of a union for violating federal labor law. Avila filed an unfair labor practice charge against Teamsters Local 848 in August 2023, which led to the current NLRB action. Avila maintained that Teamsters union officials violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by intimidating employees who dissented from the union.

Federal Labor Board Slams Teamsters with Complaint for Threats of Violence

On February 9, NLRB Region 21 in Los Angeles issued a complaint against Teamsters Local 848. The complaint maintains that the union, through an agent, had “threatened unit employees with physical violence for not supporting the Union.”

“By the conduct described above…Respondent has been restraining and coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act in violation of Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act,” the complaint says. Section 7 of the NLRA protects private sector workers’ right to refrain from union activities.

Long Beach Savage Services Employees Have Also Charged Union with Seizing Dues Money Illegally

NLRB Region 21’s complaint is the latest chapter in a long-running battle between Teamsters Local 848 union bosses and rank-and-file workers at the Long Beach Savage Services facility. Nelson Medina won a Foundation-backed settlement against the union in February 2022, which ordered Teamsters officials to pay back thousands of dollars in illegal dues they seized from about 60 of his coworkers who objected to union membership and to funding the union’s political activity.

This settlement stemmed from Medina’s unfair labor practice charges asserting that union bosses had instructed Savage Services management to fire Medina and 12 other employees if they did not complete forms authorizing full union membership and dues payment.

“Teamsters officials’ coercive and illegal behavior knows no bounds in Long Beach, where they have threatened workers with violence for expressing dissent from the union’s agenda,” stated National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “It’s good that Teamsters Local 848 is finally in the crosshairs of a federal prosecution. However, the years-long struggle by Savage Services workers against union officials’ blatant violations of labor law shows why California workers need more, not less, protection from union boss coercion.

“Californians and all American workers deserve the protections of Right to Work, which ensures union membership and dues payment are strictly voluntary,” Mix added.

23 Apr 2024

UAW Faces Federal Charges for Threatening Philly Dometic Employees with Termination If They Go to Work

Posted in News Releases

Charge says union officials sent mass text threatening termination for continuing to work.

Philadelphia, PA (April 23, 2024) – United Auto Workers (UAW) officials at the Philadelphia-area plant of auto accessory manufacturer Dometic are facing new worker-filed charges for sending a mass text to employees illegally threatening their employment if they choose to work during the strike. The new charges, which now await review by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), come after several employees hit the UAW with NLRB charges accusing the union of imposing unlawful disciplinary procedures on them despite their resignation from the union, and illegally seizing money from their paychecks.

Dometic employee Mario Coccie filed the charges with free legal aid from the National Right to Work 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 and continue working.

Coccie, one of the seven workers who originally filed charges against the UAW, included details about the mass text in his charges. According to his filing, the new threats from UAW bosses were directed beyond those who filed charges against the union initially and threaten everyone who choose to work during the strike with losing their jobs and being “judged” by union militants at an internal union trial.

“The information in this text reveals union officials’ real intentions, which is to hurt anyone willing to stand up for themselves,” said Mario Coccie. “What is happening in this case is completely unjust.”

UAW Union Officials Threaten Workers for Desiring to Leave

The UAW’s mass text message, apparently sent by union official Mike Poust, warns workers that “There are and will be consequences for crossing the line becoming a scab [sic] you will be put on trial you will be judged by your peers…[you will] have no right to hold or acquire any [union-controlled] job within the plant.”

These threats come in addition to intimidation detailed by seven Dometic workers in past charges, which explained that a union steward told each of them during a September 8, 2023, meeting that any employee who crossed the UAW’s picket line during the strike would be subject to internal union charges, fined, and ultimately terminated. Despite resigning their union membership and no longer being legally subject to internal union discipline, UAW union officials notified each worker in December 2023 that the union had started proceedings against them and their presence would soon be required at an internal union trial.

The seven employees also charged that union officials ignored their rights as nonmembers under the Right to Work Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court case, and took full union dues (including dues for union political activities) from their paychecks even after they had resigned their membership.

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 keeping their jobs. However, as per Beck, this managing fee cannot include any money that funds a union’s political or lobbying activities. Beck also requires union officials to provide financial disclosures to workers who send a Beck notice.

“UAW union officials are waging a multi-million-dollar propaganda campaign to bring more workers into their ranks, but Mr. Coccie and the workers at the Philadelphia Dometic plant represent the reality of what workers experience under the UAW’s control,” Mark Mix, president of the Right to Work Foundation said. “This is just the latest of many examples of the illegal retaliation that workers face when they act independently and refuse to tow the union line. The National Right to Work Legal Foundation stands ready to defend these workers’ rights and the rights of others targeted by power-hungry union bosses.”

20 Mar 2024

Ohio Kroger Employee Slams UFCW and Kroger with Federal Charges for Illegally Seizing Money from Paycheck

Posted in News Releases

Union officials threatened that employee would be fired for not signing illegal dues deduction authorization form, Kroger still taking dues from employee’s paycheck

Fairfield, OH (March 20, 2024) – An employee of Kroger’s location in the Fairfield Center Mall Shopping Center has hit the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 75 union with federal charges, stating that union officials threatened him with termination for refusing to sign an illegal union membership form. Kroger is also the subject of a charge for illegally transferring dues money from the employee’s paycheck to the union.

The worker, James Carroll, submitted his charges at Region 9 of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Cincinnati with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation.

Carroll’s charges explain that the form UFCW union bosses forced him to sign is an illegal “dual purpose” membership form, which seeks only one employee signature for authorization of both union membership and dues deductions. Federal labor law requires that any authorization for union dues deductions be voluntary and separate from a union membership application. Additionally, Supreme Court precedents like General Motors v. NLRB recognize the right of workers to refrain from union membership.

However, because Ohio lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, UFCW union officials have the power to impose contracts that force Carroll and his coworkers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping a job, even if they are nonmembers. However, union officials must always seek employees’ explicit consent before instructing an employer to deduct union dues directly from a worker’s paycheck, and forced-dues amounts can never include money that goes toward a union’s political activity, as per the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision. In Right to Work states, union dues payment is strictly voluntary.

At UFCW officials’ behest, Kroger has continued to seize full union dues from Carroll’s paycheck despite his lack of consent. Because Kroger management is complicit in assisting union agents in enforcing their illegal scheme, Carroll has also filed federal charges against Kroger.

On Illegal Dues Practices, Kroger and UFCW Are Repeat Offenders

This isn’t the first time Foundation attorneys have aided Kroger employees facing illegal dual-purpose membership forms pushed by UFCW union bosses. In February 2023, Houston, TX-area Kroger worker Jessica Haefner filed federal charges against the UFCW for presenting her with such a dual-purpose form, and for altering her writing on the form to show she consented to union dues deductions when she was actually trying to exercise her right under Texas’ Right to Work law to abstain from dues payment.

In 2023, Foundation attorneys also assisted a Pittsburgh-area teen file federal discrimination charges against a UFCW local after union officials illegally refused to consider his religious objections to paying union dues.

“Federal law protects the right of workers to make free choices about formal union membership, and gives workers in non-Right to Work states like Ohio some ability to avoid paying for union politics and other union expenditures. But union bosses bent on obtaining greater control over workers and their pocketbooks pose real-life obstacles to exercising these rights, as do complicit employers like Kroger,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “We’re proud to help Mr. Carroll defend his rights, but ultimately Ohio workers need the protection of a Right to Work law.”

6 Feb 2024

Ontario Trucking Employee Who Revealed Union Boss Salaries Hits Teamsters Union with Federal Charge After Job Threats

Posted in News Releases

Worker on Teamsters officials’ threats: “We will not be deterred by their bullying tactics and baseless accusations against myself and others.”

Ontario, CA (February 6, 2024) – John Cwiek, an employee of Los Angeles-based transportation company Dependable Highway Express, has just hit the Teamsters Local 63 union with federal charges. Cwiek maintains that Teamsters union officials retaliated against him for revealing truthful but unfavorable information about the union to his coworkers. He is receiving free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

Cwiek sent letters to his coworkers in January containing details about union boss salaries – information Cwiek pulled from Teamsters LM-2 filings. LM-2s are public documents filed by unions and maintained for public access by the U.S. Department of Labor. 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.

The federal statute that governs private sector labor relations, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), protects both employee speech critical of unions and union officials and protects employees’ right to refrain from any or all union activities if they so choose.

“[Teamsters Local 63] violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act when its agents appeared at the worksite, interrogated Charging Party regarding his protected activities, and threatened Charging Party’s employment and by making false and defamatory accusations against him in retaliation for engaging in protected activities,” reads Cwiek’s charge.

“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. “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. We will remain steadfast in our pursuit of a better future for ourselves and our families.”

Ontario Trucking Employee’s Charges Latest in String of Challenges to Teamster Power in SoCal

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have recently aided other trucking industry employees in Southern California oppose unwanted Teamsters union influence. In October 2021, XPO Logistics employee Ozvaldo Gutierrez and his coworkers forced Teamsters Local 63 officials out of a Fashion District-area XPO facility. Teamsters Local 848 union officials were similarly ousted by Angel Herrera and his colleagues at an Airgas facility in Ventura, CA, in September 2021. In both cases, union officials departed the workplaces before employees had an opportunity to vote them out through the NLRB’s “decertification election” process – likely to avoid embarrassing election results.

Long Beach-area Savage Services employee Nelson Medina also won a Foundation-backed settlement in February 2022 ordering Teamsters Local 848 union officials to pay back thousands of dollars in illegal dues they seized from about 60 of his coworkers who objected to union membership and to funding the union’s political activity.

“Trucking workers across Southern California continue to express displeasure with union officials’ combative and illegal behavior, which makes it all the more unfortunate that California private sector workers aren’t covered by a Right to Work law,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “In non-Right to Work California, union bosses can enforce contracts that force workers to pay dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs, meaning workers like Mr. Cwiek can be forced to fund the same union hierarchy that violates their rights.”

“While Foundation staff attorneys will fight to defend Mr. Cwiek’s rights under federal labor law, all American workers should have the Right to Work freedom to decide for themselves whether union bosses have earned their financial support,” Mix added.

6 Dec 2023

L’Oréal Employee Hits Union with Federal Charges for Illegal Dues Deductions, Threats for Seeking to Oust Union

Posted in News Releases

According to charge, union agent threatened: “The union is like a big mafia…something bad is going to happen to you”

Piscataway, NJ (December 6, 2023) – Piscataway L’Oréal USA employee Ana Maria Hoyos Lopez has slammed the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union (RWDSU/UFCW) Local 262 with federal charges, which assert that RWDSU made illegal threats against her for opposing the union. She filed the charges at Region 22 of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

In September, Hoyos Lopez submitted a petition to the NLRB in which she and her coworkers requested a vote to remove the union (or “decertification vote”). She asserts in her charges that union agents targeted her as she was circulating the petition. In particular, Hoyos Lopez stated that a L’Oréal employee told her on September 6, 2023, that “the union is like a big mafia” and “something bad is going to happen to you if the union leaves.”

Hoyos Lopez’s charges also recount a September 22 union meeting in which union officials, including the RWDSU Local 262 President and shop steward, shouted her and other employees down after they brought up shortcomings in the union’s performance. The union officials demanded the pro-decertification employees leave the union’s meeting.

Even after Hoyos Lopez and other employees voluntarily departed the meeting, the charges state, the union president “chased after” Hoyos Lopez and threatened to call the police on her if she did not completely leave the public park in which the meeting took place. The charges also state that union officials approached pro-decertification L’Oreal employee Jarry Moreno at the same meeting and told him to convince Hoyos Lopez to withdraw the petition.

Hoyos Lopez’s charges indicate that she experienced more illegal activity than just intimidation from union agents. RWDSU union officials also refused to honor or respond to emails she sent resigning her union membership and opting out of dues payments for union political expenses. New Jersey lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector employees, and thus allows union officials and management to enforce contracts in which workers are forced to pay union fees as a condition of getting or keeping a job. However, the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision guards workers from being forced to pay any dues that go toward union politics or other expenses unrelated to the union’s bargaining functions.

“As such, RWDSU/UFCW Local 262 must honor [Hoyos Lopez’s] resignation request, and given there is no collective bargaining agreement in place, cease all further deductions from [her] paycheck,” the charges state.

Illegal Union Threats Continue After Contested Election

The election to decertify RWDSU, which took place October 19 and 20, is currently the subject of objections from Hoyos Lopez. The objections assert that union officials unlawfully interfered with the election through their intimidating actions during the September 22 meeting, as well as through campaign misrepresentations and racially-charged tactics.

Hoyos Lopez’s federal charges, which she filed after submitting her election objections, state that employees she believed were acting on behalf of the union targeted her after she attempted to defend the integrity of the election. On November 27, “a L’Oréal contractor…intimidated [Hoyos Lopez]” and told her that “people say you have to leave because you have problems with the union.”

The charges argue that all of these actions by RWDSU union officials and alleged union agents are clear violations of Hoyos Lopez’s rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law the NLRB is charged with enforcing. Section 7 protects workers’ right to refrain from union activities.

“It appears abundantly clear that RWDSU union officials at the L’Oréal USA plant leveraged threats, intimidation, and a host of other divisive tactics in order to demonize any worker who went against their agenda,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The union’s focus was clearly on maintaining their forced-dues power over L’Oréal employees, even at the expense of steamrolling the rights of the workers they claim to ‘represent’ – they were deprived of a fair election, and couldn’t even voice legitimate concerns about the union without fear of retaliation.”

“Foundation staff attorneys will continue to fight for Ms. Hoyos Lopez and her coworkers until they can exercise their right to vote on whether RWDSU bosses deserve to stay in a free and uncoerced environment,” Mix added.