Overwhelming Majority of Union Kitchen Workers File Petition Seeking to Remove UFCW Union
Request for end of union so-called ‘representation’ comes amid contentious boycott and picket ordered by union officials against rank-and-file workers
Washington, DC (July 14, 2023) – Employees of five Union Kitchen Grocery locations in the Washington, DC, metro area have filed a petition seeking to end United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 400’s monopoly bargaining power over workers. The employees submitted their decertification petition to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 5 with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Union Kitchen employee Ashley Silva submitted a union decertification petition that was supported by the vast majority of her coworkers. Under NLRB rules, this should trigger an NLRB-administered decertification vote. Under federal labor law, it is illegal for employers to engage in monopoly bargaining that impacts the employment terms of all employees, even those opposed to unionization, with a minority union that lacks the support of a bare majority of workers.
With the petition now filed, the NLRB should now promptly schedule a secret ballot election so the workers can formally vote to end union officials’ power to impose a contract, including forced dues, on the workers.
Because the District of Columbia lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, UFCW union officials have the power to enter into an agreement with Union Kitchen forcing Silva and her coworkers at the four DC locations to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs. In contrast, in Right to Work jurisdictions like those at Union Kitchen’s Northern Virginia location, union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary.
Silva and her coworkers’ effort comes amid union boss-ordered pickets and boycotts against Union Kitchen Grocery locations, which have inflamed tensions among workers and raised questions about union officials’ motives. In some instances, reportedly union picketers have endangered workers by blocking exits, requiring the intervention of police.
“The vast majority of the workers at Union Kitchen are sick and tired of the UFCW’s picketing, harassment of employees, and constant disruptions of our day-to-day work life,” Silva said. “If the union cares at all about what we want, they will respect our wishes and immediately disclaim their interest in representing workers who have overwhelmingly rejected them.”
Union Kitchen Effort Latest in Wave of Union Decertification Efforts Nationwide
Foundation attorneys are currently assisting workers nationwide in a number of high-profile decertification efforts. Most notably, Starbucks employees at locations in Buffalo, New York City, Pittsburgh, and Bloomington, MN, are seeking to remove the Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) union only one year after the union launched a highly-publicized campaign in an attempt to unionize the coffee chain.
In Miami, Foundation attorneys also recently aided XPO Logistics freight drivers in removing an unwanted Teamsters union from their facility. Teamsters bosses, including James Hoffa, considered the Miami XPO contract a breakthrough. Now those workers have rejected the Teamsters.
The NLRB’s data shows a unionized private sector worker is now far more likely to be involved in a decertification effort as their nonunion counterpart is to be involved in a unionization campaign. NLRB statistics also show a 20% increase in decertification petitions last year versus 2021. However, union officials still have many ways to manipulate federal labor law to prevent workers from voting them out, including by filing unrelated or unverified charges against management.
“Disrupting a work environment with continuous pickets and boycotts is not what Union Kitchen Grocery employees want or need. The employees’ overwhelming support for a union decertification vote should send a strong message to UFCW union officials that they need to leave,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation attorneys will defend these employees in the exercise of their rights, and will oppose any attempts by UFCW officials to disenfranchise the Union Kitchen workers of their legal right to remove a union they so clearly want nothing to do with.”
Dallas-Based Danone North America Employee Slams Union with Federal Charges for Illegally Seizing Money from Pay
Charge comes while employees seek vote to remove UFCW union from facility
Dallas, TX (July 11, 2023) – Alex Botello, a Dallas-based employee of food manufacturer Danone North America, has hit the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 540 union with federal charges after union officials illegally seized union dues from his paycheck. Botello filed his charges at Region 16 of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Dallas with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Botello’s charge says that UFCW bosses rebuffed or ignored his two attempts to revoke a dues checkoff authorization. Botello maintains that the union’s actions violate his rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which is supposed to protect American private sector workers’ right to refrain from union activity.
Because Texas is a Right to Work state, UFCW union officials lack the legal authority to demand any money from Botello as a condition of employment. Right to Work laws provide more comprehensive protections than the NLRA by making union membership and all union dues payment strictly voluntary for private sector workers. In non-Right to Work states, in contrast, union officials can force workers to pay some union fees as a condition of getting or keeping a job.
Worker Followed Union Instructions to Stop Dues Deductions, But Union Continued to Take Money
Botello’s charge says that he first tried to stop dues deductions from his paycheck in October 2022. The UFCW rejected his request in a letter, which stated that his attempt was untimely and that he could only revoke his dues checkoff during a narrow union-created “window period” lasting from March 27, 2023, until April 11, 2023.
Botello resubmitted his revocation request on April 3, 2023, within the “window period” specified by the union. However, union dues did not stop coming out of his paycheck. “The Union’s failure to accept Charging Party’s timely revocation letter and immediately cease deducting dues violates the National Labor Relations Act,” reads Botello’s charge.
Workers Nationwide Battle Illegal UFCW Dues Schemes
Botello’s charge is just the latest Foundation-backed legal action that workers across the country have taken against UFCW union officials for illegal dues practices. Also in Texas, Houston Kroger employee Jessica Haefner is challenging UFCW Local 455 union officials’ collection of dues from her paycheck under the guise of a union card that was altered to show her consent to dues deductions she never agreed to. As in Botello’s case, Haefner followed union officials’ directions on how to end union dues deductions, but money continued to come out of her wages.
In Pennsylvania, Foundation attorneys represented Giant Eagle supermarket cashier Josiah Leonatti, who charged UFCW Local 1776KS union officials with refusing to accommodate his religious objections to union membership. His charges say union officials tried to subject him to an illegal “religion test” before they considered granting him an accommodation.
UFCW Officials Attempting to Remain in Power Despite Danone Employees’ Request for Union Decertification Vote
Separately, Botello and his coworkers submitted two petitions to the NLRB, asking the agency for a vote to remove, or “decertify,” the UFCW union. Botello submitted the first petition on August 29, 2022, but regional NLRB officials rejected the petition at UFCW bosses’ behest. NLRB officials claimed that a contract ratified by union bosses and management in 2019 would remain in effect until November 15, 2022. As per the NLRB’s non-statutory “contract bar” policy, union officials can block workers from exercising their right to vote them out of a workplace for up to three years after a contract is finalized.
Botello submitted the second petition after the 2019 union contract expired, based on the NLRB Region’s decision on the first petition finding that the 2019 contract was operative on August 29, the day that Botello submitted the first petition. However, regional NLRB officials blocked the second petition on the grounds that a more recent contract had actually been in effect since August 25. This is a contradiction to the regional NLRB decision blocking the first petition, as that decision rested on the conclusion that the 2019 contract was in effect on August 29, not the union’s August 25 contract.
Botello filed requests for review challenging the Region’s dismissals of both petitions. The NLRB granted Botello’s requests and directed Region 16 to take another look at these cases.
“The situation at the Dallas Danone plant illustrates how far UFCW union bosses, and in many instances NLRB officials, are willing to go to trap workers under union monopoly control and forced dues, even when there’s clear evidence that workers do not support them,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Any worker under UFCW control who experiences similar infringements of their rights should not hesitate to reach out to the Foundation for free legal aid.”
Teen Supermarket Cashier Fired for Refusing to Join and Fund UFCW Union
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, May/June 2023 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Union officials required teen to violate his religious beliefs or be fired
Josiah Leonatti may be young, but he’s not afraid to stand up to UFCW bosses, who got him fired over objecting to union membership and dues on religious grounds.
PITTSBURGH, PA – Josiah Leonatti, a high schooler, was fired last year for his religious beliefs. Giant Eagle and the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union compel employees, like Leonatti, to either join or fund the union to keep their jobs. The problem for Leonatti is that he cannot do so without compromising his religious beliefs.
When Leonatti was hired, he never expected that union bosses would force him to choose between his job and his religious convictions. But the union officials did just that.
With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Leonatti hit UFCW union officials and Giant Eagle in January with federal discrimination charges. Although Giant Eagle rehired Leonatti to limit liability, neither Giant Eagle nor the union agreed to accommodate his religious beliefs. So Leonatti faces discharge, again, unless he funds the union.
Moreover, the union demands that Leonatti submit to an illegal “religion test.” Before the company and union will consider accommodation, they demand that Leonatti answer irrelevant and inappropriate questions to determine whether his religious beliefs are valid.
UFCW Bosses Tried to Get Teen Fired After He Voiced Religious Objections
Foundation attorneys filed charges for Leonatti against the union at both the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) based on federal law. Foundation attorneys also filed charges against Leonatti’s employer, Giant Eagle.
Federal law requires unions and employers to accommodate employees who have religious objections to joining or paying dues to a union. And federal law also prohibits forced union membership regardless of a worker’s reason for not wanting to affiliate with a union.
Leonatti’s charges report that he attended employee training last year as a cashier trainee. There, a store manager told new hires that they “must sign papers to join the United Food And Commercial Workers.” According to the NLRB charges, “No other options were even hinted at.”
After reviewing the papers with his family, Leonatti’s charges explain, he mailed a letter to UFCW officials detailing his sincere religious objections to joining and supporting the union. He also presented the same letter in person at training.
Rather than accommodate his religious beliefs as required by law, a company official “dismissed [Leonatti] from training and sent [him] home.” The same official later called Leonatti and told him that union membership is compulsory at Giant Eagle, and admitted the grocery store had terminated him over his refusal to join.
UFCW officials responded to Leonatti’s letter by mail on November 10, 2022, rejecting the written explanation of his religious objection and demanding he “complete its religious examination” before they even considered granting him an accommodation. Even if he passed this “test,” the charges say, union officials threatened that he would still have to pay an amount equal to full UFCW union dues to a charity approved by union bosses. Giant Eagle has not offered a religious accommodation to Leonatti, and the union has not retracted its threats or agreed to accommodate him.
Teen’s Firing Shows Need for Pennsylvania Right to Work Protections
Leonatti’s EEOC charges seek to compel the UFCW union and Giant Eagle to provide him a legally required religious accommodation. In addition, the NLRB charges state that relief must include unitwide notice and corporate training regarding workers’ right to refrain from union membership, among other remedies.
“Union bosses’ attempt to coerce a high school student to violate his religious beliefs is unconscionable and illegal,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “We’re proud to support Mr. Leonatti as he defends his rights and beliefs. This should serve as a stark reminder that all Americans deserve Right to Work protections.”
“If Pennsylvania were a Right to Work state, Leonatti wouldn’t be forced to present his religious objections to expectedly hostile union chiefs,” Semmens added. “In a Right to Work state, he and other dissenting employees would have a statutorily protected right to cut off dues payments for any reason. All employees deserve the right to choose whether to fund a union.”
Oakland County Employee Slams Union with Federal Charges Over Illegal Seizure of Dues
As Right to Work repeal looms, Milford, Michigan, Kroger employee challenges UFCW union membership form designed to coerce dues deductions
Milford, MI (May 3, 2023) – Michigan Kroger employee Roger Cornett recently filed a federal unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 876. Cornett is receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
On April 26, Kroger employee Roger Cornett charged UFCW union officials with illegally seizing union dues from his paycheck. According to his charge, Cornett was presented with a “union membership application” form to complete during an employee orientation.
The form indicated that signing it would authorize both union membership and dues deductions. Cornett’s charge says the form violates federal labor law because of its “dual purpose” nature, as the law requires any authorization for union dues deductions to be voluntary and separate from a union membership application.
Cornett attempted to resign his union membership and revoke his dues deduction authorization around March 8. He successfully resigned his membership, but the union refused to stop deducting dues from Cornett’s paycheck, alleging that Cornett could only exercise his right to stop dues deductions within a tiny “window period” enforced by union officials.
Cornett’s charge comes as Michigan legislators have decided to repeal Michigan’s popular Right to Work law, which prohibits union officials from forcing workers to join or pay dues to a union to get or keep a job. Once the repeal becomes effective, Michigan union officials will again be able to get workers fired for refusal to pay union fees.
The Foundation published a legal notice to Michigan workers, stating “after the repeal statute takes effect, it will be legal under Michigan law for private-sector employers and unions to enter into agreements that compel workers to pay fees to unions as a condition of employment.” The notice also informs Michigan Workers of their legal options after the repeal of Right to Work.
“Union boss pressures will only increase as the repeal of Right to Work nears. Foundation staff attorneys will continue to assist Mr. Cornett in navigating his case,” states Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “In less than a year, Michigan union bosses will once again have the power to demand workers be terminated merely for refusing to support the union’s agenda with their hard-earned money.”
“The Michigan legislature and Governor Whitmer, both of whom genuflect to union boss lobbyists, made a huge mistake in repealing the Right to Work law previously protecting individual workers. Numerous polls have shown Michiganders’ overwhelming support for the Right to Work law, and yet the Michigan Legislature chose to ignore the will of the people and the rights of workers,” continued Mix. “However, even as the demise of the Right to Work law in Michigan looms, Michigan workers can still reach out to National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys to learn what rights they have to oppose union coercion, and to request help in exercising those rights.”
Houston-Area Kroger Employee Slams UFCW Union with Federal Charges for Seizing Union Dues Using Altered Union Card
Employee objected to union membership and financial support during orientation meeting; union taking dues under guise of altered form
Houston, TX (February 21, 2023) – Cypress-area Kroger employee Jessica Haefner has just hit the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union at her workplace and her employer with federal charges. Haefner maintains that union and Kroger officials are unlawfully seizing union dues from her paycheck based on an altered union membership form that ostensibly indicates her consent to union dues deductions, even though she followed instructions on how to exercise her right to refrain from union membership and support. Haefner filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal representation from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
Haefner’s charges state that UFCW Local 455 union officials’ actions violate her and her coworkers’ rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which guarantees American private sector workers’ right to abstain from any and all union activities. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the NLRA.
Texas’ Right to Work protections also prohibit union officials from forcing private sector workers like Haefner to join or pay dues to a union as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In contrast, states lacking Right to Work laws permit the firing of private sector workers for refusal to pay money to a union hierarchy.
Union Form Was Altered
On August 22, 2022, Haefner attended a mandatory orientation meeting during which she was required to listen to a UFCW agent, her charges state. The UFCW agent passed out a union membership application and a dues checkoff on a single form that he claimed was mandatory for attendees to complete. Another piece of onboarding literature stated that Kroger management had the “opinion that you should participate and be active in the Union.”
When Haefner asked about how she could exercise her right to refrain from joining the union or paying union dues, the union agent instructed Haefner to write “$0” in the field marked “union dues” on the form. Texas’ Right to Work law protects Haefner’s right to abstain from union membership and dues payment.
Haefner followed these instructions, but later found out that union dues were coming out of her wages, her charges say. Haefner quickly obtained a copy of the form that Kroger and UFCW officials based their dues deductions on, and discovered that the “$0” she had written in the union dues field had been replaced with an amount of several dollars to induce dues deductions from her paycheck.
UFCW Bosses Across Country Illegally Snubbing Worker Requests to Abstain from Union Activity
UFCW’s violation of Haefner’s rights is not an isolated incident. In Pennsylvania, Foundation staff attorneys are also representing Giant Eagle supermarket cashier Josiah Leonatti, who charges UFCW Local 1776KS union officials with refusing to accommodate his religious objections to union membership. His charges say union officials tried to subject him to an illegal “religion test” before they considered granting him an accommodation.
“UFCW union officials seem to adhere to a nationwide policy of prioritizing dues revenue over employees’ free association rights,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation attorneys have already witnessed that UFCW bosses are willing to discriminate against religious employees in the pursuit of more dues deductions, and in Ms. Haefner’s case their malfeasance may be as bad as flat out altering employee forms to deduct dues.”
“As cases brought for workers with free Foundation legal aid show, UFCW bosses have a long and documented history of violating workers’ rights, whether through thousands of dollars in illegal strike fines, illegal religious discrimination, threatening teenagers’ jobs, and now by altering a worker’s dues authorization,” Mix added.
Foundation Defends Grocery Employees Against Illegal Union Strike Fine Threats
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, November/December 2022 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Facing Foundation attorneys, UFCW union officials are dropping illegal fines
UFCW union officials threatened to fine King Soopers employee Nick Hall almost $1,000 just because he kept at his job during a strike. Foundation litigation ended the demands.
DENVER, CO – Grocery store workers at King Soopers are continuing to win their legal battles against United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union officials’ illegal attempts to fine workers for exercising their right to work during a January UFCW strike action. While the union remains under investigation by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a series of charges filed by workers with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, several workers have already successfully challenged thousands of dollars in union fines.
Workers Slam Union With Federal Charges After Threats
Two King Soopers workers, Nick Hall and Marcelo Ruybal, filed federal charges against UFCW in response to union officials illegally threatening to fine workers who chose to exercise their right to work during a strike. UFCW union bosses ordered an estimated 8,000 King Soopers workers out of work in January, but as a Foundation legal notice informed workers at the time, employees have the legal right to rebuff union boss strike orders, and non-member employees cannot be legally fined by the union.
Union bosses threatened Hall and Ruybal with fines of $812 and $3,800 respectively. This happened despite the fact that, as the workers noted in their NLRB charges, the fines were illegal because the workers were not voluntary union members, and therefore not legally subject to internal union fines for working during the UFCW boss-ordered 10-day strike. Some 30 NLRB charges are still being investigated by NLRB Region 27, based in Denver.
Foundation Legal Aid Prompts UFCW Bosses to Drop Fine Threats
In Hall’s case, the union backed down, rescinding the union’s illegal fine threat in a letter dated July 27, essentially acknowledging that it broke federal law. Other workers have also successfully challenged union boss fine threats following the January strike.
With free legal representation from Foundation staff attorneys, worker Yen Chan challenged the union’s authority to issue a $3,552.48 fine, with union officials backing down rather than pursuing the fine and facing further legal action. Other King Soopers workers also successfully challenged thousands of dollars in UFCW strike fines using information provided by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
“Union officials backed down quickly after being caught blatantly disregarding the law in Nick Hall’s case. But it shouldn’t take the support of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys just to force union bullies to abide by federal law,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “King Soopers workers are continuing to beat back illegal fines levied by UFCW union officials, even as union officials are still under investigation by the NLRB for unfair labor practice charges.”
King Soopers Workers Successfully Challenge Illegal UFCW Union Strike Fines with National Right to Work Legal Aid
UFCW union bosses begin dropping illegal fines against workers, but union still faces investigation on federal charges
Denver, CO (August 15, 2022) – Grocery store workers at King Soopers are continuing to battle, and win, against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 union officials’ illegal attempts to fine workers for exercising their right to work during a January UFCW strike action. While the union remains under investigation by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a series of charges filed by workers with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, several workers have already successfully challenged thousands of dollars in union fines.
In June and July three King Soopers workers, Nick Hall, Marcelo Ruybal and Hope Schaefer, filed federal charges against UFCW in response to union officials illegally threatening to fine the workers, who chose to exercise their right to work during a strike. The workers, whom union bosses are threatening to fine $812, $3,800, and $3,897.36 respectively, stated in their charges that the fines were illegal because the workers were not voluntary union members, and therefore not legally subject to internal union fines for working during the UFCW boss-ordered 10-day strike.
All three NLRB charges are still being investigated by NLRB Region 27 based in Denver.
In Schaefer’s case the union had previously even acknowledged in a 2011 letter that she was not a UFCW union member. However, although the union know she had not been a union member for more than a decade, UFCW union officials still threatened her with the nearly $4,000 fine.
In Hall’s case, the union recently backed down, rescinding the union’s illegal fine threat in a letter dated July 27, essentially acknowledging that it broke federal law. Other workers have also successfully challenged union boss fine threats following the January strike. With free legal representation from Foundation staff attorneys, worker Yen Chan challenged the union’s authority to issue a $3,552.48 fine, with union officials backing down rather than face further legal action.
At least two other King Soopers workers also successfully challenged thousands of dollars in UFCW strike fines using information provided by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys. Any worker facing such fines can still request free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation by calling 1-800-336-3600 or through the Foundation’s website: www.nrtw.org/free-legal-aid
“King Soopers workers are already beating back illegal fines levied by UFCW union officials, even as union officials are still under investigation by the NLRB for three unfair labor practice charges,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Union bosses were caught red-handed in Nick Hall’s case which is why we’re already seeing them back down, but it shouldn’t take the assistance of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys just to force union bullies to abide by federal law and cease violating the rights of rank-and-file workers.”
After 18 Months, Mountaire Farms Workers Finally Oust Union
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, March/April 2022 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Overwhelming vote against UFCW follows NLRB shredding of first ballots
Employees at Mountaire Farms in Delaware fought “contract bar” delays from tyrannical UFCW union officials for almost two years. Finally, they’ve overwhelmingly voted out the union.
SELBYVILLE, DE – Almost two years after their initial attempt, Mountaire Farms poultry employees in Delaware have decisively voted to remove United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union officials from their workplace. The drawn-out ordeal demonstrates how the “contract bar,” a controversial National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) policy, unjustly traps workers in union ranks they oppose.
Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal statute the NLRB implements, workers possess an enumerated statutory right to remove an unwanted union through a decertification election. However, the NLRB has invented out of whole cloth a “contract bar.” The “contract bar” halts workers’ right to hold a decertification election to remove a union they oppose for up to three years after union officials and a company finalize a monopoly bargaining contract.
NLRB Chucks Workers’ Votes Citing ‘Contract Bar’
Mountaire Farms workers voted in an NLRB-supervised decertification election in June 2020, but UFCW lawyers appealed the case to the full Labor Board in Washington, D.C., and were able to get the ballots impounded. After a divided NLRB ruled for the union bosses in April 2021, hundreds of cast ballots were destroyed without being counted.
The June 2020 vote was requested by Mountaire employee Oscar Cruz Sosa, who received free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys. Cruz Sosa had the support of hundreds of his coworkers when he submitted his petition to the NLRB requesting a vote.
Initially, an NLRB regional official rejected union arguments that the decertification effort was blocked due to the “contract bar,” and the election was held. However, UFCW union lawyers appealed that decision to the full Board, which impounded the ballots while the appeal was considered.
Cruz Sosa’s Foundation attorneys urged the Board to reject the UFCW’s attempt to impose the “contract bar.” More importantly, they urged the Board to eliminate the bar completely because it is not found in the text of the NLRA, and serves only to protect unpopular union bosses from worker accountability. As the brief filed by Foundation staff attorneys pointed out, the only “bar” in the text of the NLRA states that workers must wait one year after an election before holding another vote, making the threeyear “contract bar” particularly egregious.
Nevertheless, in an April 2021 ruling, a divided Board sided with union lawyers, upheld the “contract bar,” and threw out the ballots cast by workers at the 800-employee facility. As a result, the employees were forced to wait almost another year, all the while subjected to forced union dues, for the “contract bar” to expire so they could restart the process for a decertification election.
Finally, without the barrier of the NLRB’s “contract bar” policy the workers submitted another petition to hold a vote to remove the UFCW in October 2021.
Landslide Vote Against Union Highlights Injustice of Anti-Worker ‘Contract Bar’ Policy
In the subsequent vote that concluded in December 2021, the workers overwhelmingly rejected the union with 356 of 436 votes counted for removing the union. The workers are finally free of unwanted union “representation,” nearly two full years after they started their effort to remove the union, which was highly unpopular among rank-and-file Mountaire Farms employees.
“The overwhelming final vote tally emphasizes the injustice of the decision to continue the Board-invented ‘contract bar,’ which resulted in the destruction of hundreds of ballots. From the outset it was clear how little support UFCW officials really had,” observed National Right to Work Foundation Vice President and Legal Director Raymond LaJeunesse. “This case is yet another example of how the NLRB has twisted the law to protect union boss power at the expense of the statutory rights of rank-and-file employees.”
“We’re under no illusions that the Biden NLRB, stacked with former union officials, will end this longstanding impediment to workers’ right to free themselves of an unwanted union. But this saga demonstrates why the injustice that is the non-statutory ‘contract bar’ must be ended by a future Board,” LaJeunesse added.
Conagra Brands Workers Seek to Remove Unwanted UFCW Union Officials from their Workplace
Workers file decertification petition with Labor Board to oust United Food & Commercial Worker union
St. Elmo, IL (April 14, 2022) – Production and maintenance employees at Conagra Brands in St. Elmo, Illinois, have filed a petition seeking the removal of United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 881 from their workplace. The workers’ petition was filed on April 6, 2022, at National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 14 based in St. Louis, Missouri, with free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
Michelle Brockett, a long time Conagra employee, filed the decertification petition for her co-workers, supported by the signatures she collected to trigger a NLRB-conducted secret ballot vote whether to remove the union. The workers have asked the NLRB to schedule an in-person secret ballot election on April 26 and 27.
Under federal law, when at least 30% of workers in a bargaining unit sign a petition seeking the removal of union officials’ monopoly bargaining powers, an NLRB-conducted secret ballot vote to remove the union is triggered. If a majority of workers casting valid ballots do not vote for the union, the union is stripped of its government-granted monopoly “representation” powers. Those powers let union officials impose contracts on all workers in the workplace, even workers who are not union members and oppose the union. In Illinois, which lacks Right to Work protections that make union financial support strictly voluntary, union officials use their monopoly powers to mandate that all workers pay money to the union or else be fired.
National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have recently assisted workers in numerous successful decertification efforts across the nation, including for workers in Illinois, Oklahoma, and Delaware. Foundation-backed reforms to the rules for decertification elections that the NLRB adopted in 2020 have curtailed union officials’ abuse of so-called “blocking charges” used to delay or block workers from exercising their right to decertify a union. Such charges are often based on unproven allegations made against an employer, completely unrelated to workers’ desire to free themselves of the union.
In a previous decertification petition filed against UFCW Local 881 in 2019, prior to the blocking charges reform, union officials used tactics to attempt to block a vote from taking place for Pinncacle Foods Group, ultimately resulting in a delay of the vote for seven months. Although on appeal to NLRB in Washington, D.C., the workers won the ruling that finally let the vote occur, the unjustified delay contributed to union officials prevailing over the workers’ original decertification attempt.
“Thanks to Foundation-backed reforms, UFCW union officials have a much harder time using blocking charges to hinder the rights of workers, so the NLRB should promptly schedule an election for workers at Conagra Brands,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “No matter the outcome of this decertification vote, the many workers at Conagra who are opposed to the union should never have been required to fund the activities of union officials with whom they want nothing to do, which is why Illinois workers deserve the protection of a Right to Work law that makes union financial support strictly voluntary.”
Workers Nationwide Press NLRB to Scrap Policy Blocking Right to Vote Out Unions
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, March/April 2021 edition. To view other editions or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Foundation cases contend ‘contract bar’ must be eliminated to protect employee freedom
Foundation staff attorneys are assisting Delaware poultry workers in challenging UFCW bosses’ attempts to use the “contract bar” to trap them in union ranks.
WASHINGTON, DC – Foundation attorneys in January filed a Request for Review to the full National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, D.C. The Request defends the right of Virginia Transdev workers to have a vote to remove unpopular Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) Local 2 bosses from power at their workplace.
The Transdev employees, who work at the Fairfax Connector bus service in Northern Virginia, now join Foundation-backed workers in Delaware and Puerto Rico, all of whom are urging the NLRB to eliminate the “contract bar.” That is a non-statutory NLRB policy which forbids employees from exercising their right to vote out an unpopular union in an NLRB-supervised “decertification election” for up to three years after their employer and union finalize a monopoly bargaining contract.
Foundation attorneys point out in each of these cases that the “contract bar” appears nowhere in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law the NLRB is charged with enforcing, and is merely the result of past union boss-friendly decisions by the Board. They also argue that the bar undermines workers’ basic right under the NLRA to remove unions that lack majority support.
“The ‘contract bar’ undermines the fundamental objective of federal labor law: Employee free choice. It makes rank-and-file employees prisoners of an unpopular union, with no way out for up to three years,” commented National Right Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “This inevitably creates an environment in which, as these employees can certainly attest, it’s impossible to hold self-serving union bosses accountable because workers are denied the right to vote them out.”
Unpopular OPEIU Bosses Went Behind Workers’ Backs to Sign Contract
The petitioner in the Transdev workers’ case, Amir Daoud, submitted a petition on November 10, 2020, signed by the necessary number of his coworkers to trigger a “decertification election” in his workplace. This was after news had gotten around that an OPEIU union agent had told some employees in October he had “negotiated a new agreement” with Transdev management and “‘intended’ to sign it without a ratification vote.” Workers had already voted down an earlier union boss-promoted monopoly bargaining contract in June.
Foundation attorneys filed a Request for Review, which notes that the union agent didn’t inform Daoud and his coworkers of when he planned to approve the new contract — until after Daoud filed the petition. The new contract was signed by union agents on October 30 and Transdev representatives on October 31.
NLRB Region 5 in Baltimore dismissed Daoud and his coworkers’ decertification petition on December 22, ruling that the “contract bar” applied because the employees’ petition was submitted just after the new contract was signed, even though the employees had no way of knowing whether or when that signing would occur.
This prompted Daoud to ask the NLRB in Washington to review the case. Because Daoud recently accepted a job with Transdev outside the OPEIU’s monopoly bargaining control, the Request for Review asks the NLRB to recognize his coworker Sheila Currie as the new petitioner to represent the interests of the workers who signed the decertification petition.
The Request exposes the arbitrariness of the “contract bar,” pointing out that the NLRB Regional Director applied it “merely because the Union ‘won the race’ and signed the contract ten days” before Daoud submitted the petition, even though the petition clearly demonstrated the employees’ interest in voting the union out.
VA and Puerto Rico Cases Follow Groundbreaking Effort by DE Poultry Workers
The Virginia Transdev employees, and a Puerto Rico armored transit guard who submitted a similar Request for Review on behalf of his coworkers with Foundation aid in January, are now battling the “contract bar” like Delaware Mountaire Farms poultry worker Oscar Cruz Sosa and his coworkers. For almost a year now, Cruz Sosa and his fellow employees have been fighting United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union bosses’ attempts to use the “contract bar” to block their valid petition for a decertification vote. The Mountaire employees are now waiting for the NLRB to issue a ruling on their case.
In that case, UFCW officials claim that the “contract bar” should apply to bar any elections at Mountaire, despite an NLRB Regional Director’s decision allowing the vote because the union contract contains an invalid forced-dues clause.
When the UFCW bosses asked the full NLRB to review the Region’s order allowing the election, Cruz Sosa’s attorneys filed a brief urging that, if the Board granted review, it should use the opportunity to review the entire non-statutory “contract bar” policy. The Board is now doing just that. The UFCW union bosses are even arguing that the impounded ballots already cast by Mountaire workers should be destroyed, claiming the election should never have been held.
The Requests for Review submitted by Foundation staff attorneys for the Puerto Rico guard and Virginia Transdev employees each request that the NLRB should either grant review or least hold the case until a decision is issued in Cruz Sosa’s case.
