Despite Arizona Dispensary Employees’ Landslide Vote to Remove UFCW, Union Bosses Seek to Overturn Election Result
Union officials ask Labor Board to disenfranchise workers who voted 14-1 to end union affiliation
Phoenix, AZ (May 14, 2026) – Employees of Curaleaf Camelback Dispensary overwhelmingly voted United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 99 union bosses out of power at their workplace. Dispensary employee Jennifer Mooney, who filed a petition for her coworkers with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) last month, led the workers’ effort. The petition sought a “decertification” election to terminate the status of UFCW Local 99 as the workers’ exclusive “representative.”
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act, a task that includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. The petition was filed with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
Mooney’s petition, filed April 3, 2026, requested an NLRB-administered secret-ballot election for the 25-member work unit, including all full- and part-time Store Associates employed at the Curaleaf Camelback Dispensary’s Phoenix location.
The workers’ election took place on May 1, when dispensary employees voted 14-1 to remove UFCW Local 99 as the employees’ representative. However, UFCW union bosses filed a last-minute request with the NLRB seeking to overturn the workers’ decisive vote against the union.
“My colleagues and I didn’t appreciate how UFCW officials ignored our interests and tried to force a contract that we didn’t like,” stated Mooney. “We are thankful to have the Foundation’s assistance in exercising our legal rights.”
Arizona is one of the 26 states with Right to Work protections, which safeguard workers by making union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary. However, even in Right to Work states, union bosses can impose exclusive bargaining control upon all workers in a workplace, meaning they can dictate working conditions even for employees who oppose the union. A worker decertification victory would remove the union’s monopoly bargaining powers over those workers.
Foundation attorneys have recently assisted with a string of worker efforts in the cannabis industry to push out unwanted unions, including in Massachusetts, Missouri, and Ohio. Late last year, Foundation attorneys also submitted an amicus brief to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Ctrl Alt Destroy v. Elliott, Case No. 25-2419, which may determine whether state laws that impose so-called “labor peace agreements” on the cannabis industry break federal law. The Foundation’s brief argues that California’s labor peace agreement scheme violates federal labor law by forcing cannabis industry employers to bargain with union officials – even when a majority of workers haven’t expressed that they want a union – in order to lawfully operate within the state.
“Once again, rather than respect the decision of workers who overwhelmingly want to be free of the UFCW at their workplace, union lawyers are attempting to overturn the vote of workers opposed to union affiliation,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Unfortunately, many American workers who undertake to exercise their legal rights are often trapped by union officials who abuse the NLRB’s non-statutory, pro-Big Labor policies that keep workers in the unions’ rank-and-file for months or even years.
“Cannabis industry workers in particular are being targeted by Big Labor, which is using legislative efforts to impose union control in the cannabis industry, with little regard for workers’ right to have a free and fair election on union exclusive representation,” Mix added. “Foundation attorneys will always fight to ensure that workers can exercise their right to choose, free of impediments at both the state and federal levels.”
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.
Oregon Fred Meyer Grocery Store Worker Prevails Over Illegal UFCW Local 555 Strike Fine
UFCW union bosses abandon attempt to collect nearly $1,000 from worker for supposedly working four hours during strike
Portland, OR (April 16, 2026) – Portland-area Fred Meyer grocery store employee Robert Wendelschafer has prevailed in his nearly two-year dispute with United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 555 union officials. Wendelschafer filed federal charges against UFCW Local 555 after union bosses targeted him with a strike fine for exercising his right to continue working during a union boss-ordered strike action in 2024.
The charges were filed, with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, with National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 19 in early 2025. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act and adjudicating disputes between employers, unions, and individual employees.
Wendelschafer exercised his legal right to resign UFCW union membership in order to continue working on August 30, 2024. However, UFCW officials claimed the resignation letter was not delivered until after he had returned to work for four hours.
UFCW bosses then apparently attempted to use this supposed four-hour delay as a technicality to justify a fine for $992, announced in a December 2024 letter, after finding him “guilty” of violating internal UFCW rules. Longstanding law says union bosses cannot impose “union discipline” against workers who are not voluntary union members. Such discipline frequently takes the form of four- or five-figure monetary fines payable to union boss-controlled funds.
Eventually, faced with pending Unfair Labor Practice charges at the NLRB, UFCW Local 555 union officials backed down and rescinded their strike fine. At that point, with the union recognizing his resignation and no longer attempting to fine Wendelschafer, the NLRB decided not to move forward with the case against the UFCW.
Wendelschafer is one of many workers who have turned to the Foundation in recent years when faced with unlawful fines and/or fine threats by UFCW officials. In Colorado, Foundation staff attorneys assisted over a dozen King Soopers and Safeway grocery store employees after UFCW Local 7 sought to retaliate against workers who resigned their union memberships to continue working during a series of union-ordered strikes.
“We are pleased to have been able to defend Mr. Wendelschafer against UFCW union bosses’ attempts to punish him for exercising his legal rights,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “That union officials even attempted to claim that a four-hour delay in the delivery of a membership resignation letter should warrant ‘union discipline’ fines that amount to over $200 per hour is yet another demonstration that union boss greed and vindictiveness against rank-and-file workers has no limit.
“All American workers wishing to continue to work to support themselves and their families should be able to do so freely without illegal retaliation from union bosses,” added Mix.
National Right to Work Foundation Issues Legal Notice to Greeley JBS Meatpacking Employees Affected by UFCW Strike Order
Notice reminds workers wishing to return to work that they must resign their union memberships to avoid potentially ruinous strike fines
Greeley, CO (March 18, 2026) – Today, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation issued a special legal notice for workers subject to United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union bosses’ strike order against meatpacking company JBS. News reports indicate the strike order covers nearly 4,000 employees at JBS’ facility in Greeley, Colorado.
The legal notice informs these workers of rights that union officials often do not want them to know. First and foremost, JBS employees who want to keep working to support their families should resign their union memberships before returning to work to avoid union fines and internal discipline.
“The situation presents serious concerns for JBS 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 other union discipline for continuing to work to support themselves and their families.”
The legal notice alerts workers to the fact that UFCW Local 7 officials are currently facing a federal prosecution for imposing illegal discipline on King Soopers employees in connection with a 2025 strike action against the supermarket chain. “JBS employees should read this notice carefully and consider contacting Foundation staff attorneys for assistance to ensure UFCW officials cannot impose any fines against them,” the notice says.
The notice is available at: https://www.nrtw.org/jbs/.
A Spanish version of the notice can be found here: https://www.nrtw.org/es/jbs/.
Foundation: Resign Union Membership Before Returning to Work to Avoid Fines and Discipline
Most importantly, the notice informs meatpacking plant employees who want to keep working that the safest way to avoid strike fines by union bosses is to resign their union memberships before returning to work. “[I]f an employee is not a member of a union, union officials have no power to fine or discipline him or her during a strike.,” the notice says. “By resigning their membership, employees can rebuff union strike demands and return to work.”
The Foundation’s special legal notice provides workers 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, if union officials succeed in their push to impose a forced-dues contract. “Because Colorado lacks Right to Work protections, workers who have abstained from union membership may be required to pay partial union dues after a new contract is finalized,” the notice says. “However, union nonmembers have a right…to refuse to pay for union political expenses and other expenses not related to collective bargaining and contract administration.”
The notice also gives workers information on the process to submit a “decertification petition,” in which employees request a workplace election to remove the union.
“While many JBS employees may already be questioning whether UFCW Local 7 officials really have their best interests in mind by calling this strike, the fact that these very union bosses are currently being prosecuted for illegal strike discipline is a reminder that workers should be vigilant to protect their legal rights,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “JBS workers should know that they have the right to resign their union memberships and return to work to support their families, no matter what UFCW chiefs might tell them.”
Labor Board to Prosecute UFCW Local 7 for Illegally Imposing Fines on King Soopers Workers Who Refused to Strike
UFCW Local 7 has long history of illegal fines and threats against nonmembers during union strikes against both King Soopers and Safeway
Denver, CO (March 13, 2026) – The federal labor board is prosecuting the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union for unlawfully threatening workers with fines for not participating in UFCW union officials’ 2025 strike orders. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a complaint against the union after several employees of Colorado King Soopers and Safeway locations slammed the union with federal charges. These charges, filed with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, challenged fines union bosses issued simply because employees chose to work.
The NLRB’s complaint responds specifically to unfair labor practice charges filed by Ryan Lamb and Lucas Martin, both of whom were employees of a Centennial, CO, King Soopers. Both Lamb and Martin maintained in their charges that they resigned their union memberships and returned to work during the 2025 strike ordered by UFCW bosses. Even though the union had no basis on which to discipline them because they were not union members, their charges stated, UFCW agents still assessed fines against them and demanded they appear at internal union “trials.”
The NLRB is the agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law that governs labor relations in the private sector. The NLRA forbids unions from imposing internal union discipline on workers who are not members. However, the NLRA still permits union officials to extend their exclusive “representation” powers over every worker in a workplace, even those who have refrained from union membership and oppose the union’s agenda.
Colorado also lacks Right to Work protections for its workers. In the state, private sector employees can be forced to pay money to the union as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In contrast, in Right to Work states, like Colorado’s neighbors Utah, Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma, union membership and union financial support are strictly voluntary and the choice of each individual worker.
Supermarket Employees’ Charges Against UFCW Local 7 Piling Up
The NLRB’s complaint notes that UFCW Local 7 imposed fines on Martin and Lamb “even though the employees had previously tendered valid membership resignations to [the union] and were not members of [the union].” The complaint declares that such behavior “restrain[s] and coerc[es] employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the [NLRA].” The case will now go before an NLRB Administrative Law Judge (ALJ).
Foundation attorneys are currently representing eight employees of Colorado Safeway supermarkets who are charging UFCW Local 7 union officials with subjecting them to illegal fine threats in connection with 2025 strike actions. These cases are very similar to those Foundation attorneys took on for several workers in 2022, who faced impositions of sometimes thousands of dollars in fines from the same union hierarchy simply for continuing to do their jobs during a strike.
“UFCW Local 7 union officials continue to defy basic principles of federal labor law, and now they are facing a federal prosecution,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation staff attorneys are proud to help Colorado grocery store workers defend themselves from coercive UFCW schemes, and this victory should signal to workers not only that UFCW bosses’ agenda often kneecaps workers’ rights, but also that workers have options to continue to work during a strike.”
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.”
Four Colorado Safeway Workers Slam UFCW Union Officials With More Federal Charges for Illegal Strike Fines
Charge: UFCW Local 7 unlawfully subjected nonmember employees to ‘internal disciplinary’ fines for not abiding by a union boss-ordered strike
Denver, CO (February 23, 2026) – Four employees at three separate Safeway grocery stores located near Denver have filed federal charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union.
The workers’ charges were filed with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in response to union bosses illegally threatening the workers and their colleagues with fines for choosing to exercise their right to work despite a union boss-ordered strike action. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and adjudicating disputes between employers, unions, and individual employees.
Claire Jordan, who works at Safeway in Greeley, Rebecca White, who works at Safeway in Longmont, and Dustin Mattos and Rebecca Lawless-Mattos, who both work at a Lakewood Safeway location, are demanding that NLRB Region 27 investigate and prosecute UFCW Local 7 union bosses for violating their rights under the NLRA.
According to the charges, after the workers validly resigned their union membership in June 2025, union officials informed the workers around January 9, 2026 that they would be subject to “internal union charges…for, among other things, crossing the picket line while being a union member.”
The workers resigned their memberships in order to continue working after UFCW Local 7 union bosses ordered grocery workers at more than 40 Safeway stores and a distribution center in Colorado to strike in June 2025. Longstanding law says union bosses cannot impose “union discipline,” which frequently means four- or five-figure monetary fines, against workers who are not voluntary union members.
In addition to retaliating against nonmember workers, the charges say that UFCW Local 7 union officials have failed to comply with federal law by not providing the workers with the required financial disclosures under the Foundation-won Beck decision, which allows nonmember workers to withhold the portions of their forced dues that go to the UFCW’s political activities.
Colorado is one of the 24 states that lack Right to Work protections for workers, which allows UFCW union bosses to impose monopoly bargaining contracts that force employees to pay union fees as a condition of employment. By contrast, in Right to Work states like neighboring Arizona, Utah, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma, union membership and union financial support are strictly voluntary.
The Safeway strike order came months after UFCW Local 7 had similarly ordered a strike at 79 King Soopers grocery stores in February 2025. As happened following the Safeway strike, King Soopers employees also turned to the National Right to Work Foundation for assistance in filing charges against the UFCW, in response to union officials issuing illegal fine threats against nonmembers for exercising their right to work during a strike.
The Foundation has seen a growing number of workers seeking aid in cases involving illegal retaliation from UFCW union bosses. Foundation attorneys assisted nonmember King Soopers employees targeted following a 2022 strike, and have secured numerous victories against UFCW, including for illegal strike fine threats during a union-ordered strike against Stop & Shop stores in New England.
“Once again, UFCW Local 7 union bosses are turning to threats and intimidation tactics against workers who chose to rebuff union strike orders and work to support themselves and their families,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The Foundation will continue to assist grocery workers defending themselves against these recidivist UFCW union bosses.”
Cincinnati-Area Kroger Worker Secures Victory Against Illegal Union Dues Deductions
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, May/June 2025 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
After legal win, grocery employee based near Cincinnati finds job in nearby Right to Work Kentucky to escape forced dues
Northern Kentucky (foreground) might be just across the Ohio River from Cincinnati, OH, but the difference in worker freedom is stark. Without Right to Work, forced dues abuses are rampant compared to Right to Work Kentucky.
CINCINNATI, OH – In a win for employee freedom, James Carroll, a Kroger employee based near Cincinnati, has secured victory in his federal case against United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 75 and Kroger. The win comes after Carroll challenged the union and his employer for unlawfully deducting union dues from his paycheck and threatening him with termination for refusing to sign an illegal dues deduction form.
Carroll, with free legal support from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 9 in Cincinnati. His case exposed the UFCW’s use of an unlawful “dual-purpose” membership form, which combines union membership and dues deduction authorization into a single signature. Under established Supreme Court legal precedents, workers have the right to refrain from formal union membership, and any dues deduction authorizations must be voluntary and separate from membership agreements.
In order to avoid further prosecution, Kroger and UFCW entered into a settlement that requires them to reimburse Carroll for the illegally seized dues and publicly post a notice informing other employees of their rights.
But Carroll didn’t stop there. To protect himself from future union coercion, he secured a transfer to a Kroger store in Right to Work Kentucky. Unlike Ohio, where workers can be forced to pay union fees even as non-members, Kentucky’s Right to Work law ensures that all union payments are voluntary, shielding Carroll from further threats that he pay up or face termination.
This case challenging the UFCW’s forced dues abuse of grocery employees isn’t an isolated incident. In 2023, Houston-area Kroger employee Jessica Haefner, also aided by Foundation attorneys, filed charges against UFCW for using a dual-purpose form and altering her response to falsely indicate consent for dues deductions.
More recently, in 2024, Portland grocery worker Reegin Schaffer won a case against UFCW after union officials ignored her resignation request during a strike and retaliated by attempting to fine her for working.
Another Worker Flees to the Freedom of Right to Work
“We are pleased with this legal win for Mr. Carroll, and that he is now completely free of union bosses’ forced-dues demands in Right to Work Kentucky,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President and Legal Director William Messenger.
“Unfortunately most workers employed in forced dues states don’t have the option to commute to a job in a Right to Work state, which is why workers everywhere need the protection of Right to Work laws.”
