Jacksonville, FL (March 30, 2005) – National Right to Work Foundation attorneys today announced they are withdrawing charges in a case brought by local United Parcel Service (UPS) workers against Teamsters Union Local 385, after union officials belatedly refunded dues money unlawfully seized from workers’ paychecks.

Upon receiving the reimbursement checks worth more than $2,500 combined, and written notice that union officials had finally accepted their resignations as required by law, the two workers withdrew their charge against the Teamsters union local.

Johnny Bass and Kenneth Johnson obtained free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys and filed the charges in November of 2004 with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after union officials repeatedly refused to accept employees’ resignations from the union and continued to deduct full union dues from their paychecks.

The employees alleged that the Teamsters union’s practices were part of a pattern of discrimination against similarly situated employees who wish to exercise their rights to refrain from union membership.

“Union officials want workers like these simply to shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “For the Teamsters officials, it’s all about the money – regardless of whether workers want anything to do with the union.”

The actions of Teamsters officials’ actions violated employee rights explicitly recognized under the U.S. Supreme Court Pattern Makers v. NLRB decision. Under Pattern Makers and subsequent NLRB rulings, union officials are obligated to honor immediately the resignations of employees from union membership at any time.

Additionally, Teamsters officials’ actions violated the spirit of Florida’s highly-popular Right to Work law, on the books since 1968, which prevents workers from having to join or pay dues to an unwanted union.

“Unfortunately, even in states like Florida where Right to Work protections exist, workers continue to face the heavy-handed tactics of union officials,” said Gleason.

LOS ANGELES, Calif. (March 30, 2005) — More than 97,000 Los Angeles County home care providers will receive checks in the mail this week as part of a civil rights lawsuit settlement that requires union officials to rebate an estimated $7.5-8 million in illegally seized compulsory union dues.

The rebates are the result of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 434B officials’ illegal forcing of home care providers to pay for politics and other activities unrelated to collective bargaining, as well as seizing fees in excess of the negotiated amount.

Represented by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, the providers began the settlement process in December 2002. The settlement was originally thought to involve only 60,000 rather than over 97,000 individuals. The rebates, originally estimated at $5 million, are now expected to be as much as $8 million.

“This settlement is an incremental yet important step towards holding union officials in California accountable for how they collect and spend workers’ compulsory union dues,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “However, the ultimate solution to this sort of abuse is to end union officials’ government-granted privileges to force employees to pay union dues or be fired from their jobs.”

In December 2001, Carla West and three other home care providers filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against SEIU Local 434B, the Personal Assistance Services Council (PASC) of Los Angeles County, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, and others.

In settling valid constitutional claims, SEIU officials agreed to return forced union dues illegally seized from workers who were not formal union members.

During the period for which rebates are being paid, SEIU union officials failed to follow the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision in Chicago Teachers v. Hudson. That decision requires unions to provide objecting employees an audited disclosure and advance reduction of forced union dues used for politics and other non-bargaining activities. After months of stonewalling, the SEIU produced an audit showing that a mere 48 percent of union dues are spent for collective bargaining. Objecting nonmember home care providers now pay half of what full union members pay in dues.

In 1999, Local 434B officials gained recognition by PASC as the exclusive bargaining agents of home care workers who provide non-medical in-home support services to disabled and elderly clients. Although they are reimbursed through the state, the workers are independently hired, fired, and supervised by individual recipients of home care. The constitutionally suspect agreement brokered between union operatives and government bureaucrats declares that home care providers are “public employees” for collective bargaining purposes only, even though the PASC “employer” has no authority over hiring, firing, work schedules, workplace safety, disputes with the employer-recipient, and the amount the state pays the workers.

Bridgeport, Connecticut (March 29, 2005) — A U.S. District Court Justice has approved a settlement of a case brought by six Bridgeport firefighters in a federal class-action lawsuit against the City of Bridgeport, a union, and top city officials for violations of their First Amendment rights by seizing compulsory union dues from the paychecks of scores of nonunion firefighters.

After receiving free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, the firefighters’ won a settlement forcing International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) union Local 834 officials to return $45,000 in union dues unlawfully seized between June 2002 and October 2004.

Union officials acted in concert with the City of Bridgeport and seized compulsory union dues from the firefighters who are not formal union members without first providing an adequate independent audit of the union’s expenditures, as required by law. The suit also named Bridgeport Mayor John Michael Fabrizi, among other top city officials, for the unconstitutional acts.

“IAFF union officials simply want nonunion firefighters to shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union operatives should not be allowed trample on firefighters’ constitutional rights by unlawfully seizing dues from their paychecks.”

The firefighters filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut in June 2004. They alleged that IAFF Local 834 union officials seized the forced union dues without first providing the financial disclosure and procedures required by a long-standing U.S. Supreme Court ruling interpreting that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution protect public employees from demands to pay for union political activity and other activities they may oppose.

As a result of the case’s class-action status, the settlement provides restitution for all firefighters in the bargaining unit who are not formal members of IAFF Local 834 in the amount of forced dues collected prior to October 2004. At the same time, the settlement forces IAFF officials to cease deducting dues from those who not members until such time as the city and union comply with all of the constitutional requirements to collect dues.

Under the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, before collecting any forced dues, union officials must first provide an audited disclosure of the union’s expenses. Such audits are intended to ensure that forced union dues seized from nonunion public employees do not fund union activities unrelated to collective bargaining.

High Point, North Carolina (March 15, 2005) – Responding to threats against an employee who led a successful legal challenge to the United Auto Workers (UAW) union’s forced unionization of the Thomas Built Bus facility, the National Right to Work Foundation today commissioned a 24-hour security detail at the employee’s home.

Meanwhile, the Foundation called upon two local district attorneys and police chiefs to open an investigation into the UAW union’s possible role in encouraging reprisals against workers opposing unionization.

The Foundation hired the security firm, Corporate Security International, Inc. which is staffed by former United States Army Delta Force counter-terrorism experts, after menacing flyers were circulated throughout the plant containing Jeff Ward’s phone number and detailed driving directions to his personal residence. A call to arms on the flyer reads “Jeff Ward lives here. Go tell him how you really feel about the union.”

The threat came as Ward successfully settled federal labor charges filed on behalf of his coworkers against the UAW union, Thomas Built, and Freightliner who federal labor prosecutors found had struck a sweetheart deal resulting in the unlawful coercing of employees into union ranks.

In a letter dated today, Foundation staff attorney Bill Messenger called upon the district attorneys for Guilford and Davidson counties, as well as the Thomasville and High Point police chiefs to investigate the harassment in order to protect Ward and his family, who have already begun to receive harassing phone calls late at night.

Referencing the flyer, Messenger urged, “This map constitutes a threat. It is an inducement for individuals to harass or do violence to Mr. Ward’s person, family, and/or property, based on his legal cause of action against the UAW. I urge that a thorough investigation be conducted as to the origin of this unlawful threat, and that the perpetrators of this action be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

“Given the documented role of UAW militants in union violence, it’d be unwise to take chances when it comes to the safety of Jeff Ward, his wife, and his children,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Union violence is a harsh reality, and Mr. Ward and his family should not have to live in fear simply because he came forward to assert his rights and the rights of his fellow employees.”

Facing prosecution by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), UAW union and Freightliner officials were forced to agree last week to cancel outright a company-wide sweetheart deal in which union officials had unlawfully bargained to cap workers’ wages and made other major concessions in exchange for Freightliner’s active assistance in coercing workers to unionize.

Based on evidence provided by Foundation attorneys, the NLRB’s General Counsel found that Freightliner officials at Thomas Built provided unlawful assistance to the union and held unlawful “captive audience” speeches jointly with union officials to coerce employees to sign union authorization cards that were treated as “votes” in favor of unionization.

Read the Foundation’s Letter to the High Point District Attorney

High Point, North Carolina (March 10, 2005) – Facing prosecution by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), United Auto Workers (UAW) union and Freightliner officials today agreed to cancel outright a company-wide sweetheart deal in which union officials had unlawfully bargained to limit workers’ wage demands and made other major concessions in exchange for Freightliner’s active assistance in coercing workers to unionize.

Based on evidence provided by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys for Thomas Built Bus employee Jeff Ward, the NLRB’s General Counsel found that Freightliner officials at Thomas Built provided unlawful assistance to the union and held unlawful “captive audience” speeches jointly with union officials to coerce employees to sign union authorization cards that were treated as “votes” in favor of unionization.

Even more significantly, the General Counsel issued an unfair labor practice complaint challenging a secret agreement between Freightliner and the UAW union titled “Agreement on Preconditions to a Card Check Procedure” as constituting unlawful “premature bargaining” over substantive terms and conditions of employment before the union had achieved majority support among the employees.

The unlawful agreement spelled out what provisions would be contained in future collective bargaining agreements and would ensure a compliant company union that would not aggressively advocate for the employees.

The new settlement reached today came after Ward objected to an earlier settlement proposal in which UAW officials had agreed not to act as the employees’ bargaining representative, but were allowed to use the coercive arrangement at other Freightliner facilities.

Like the previous proposed settlement, the new settlement cancels the union’s recognition at Thomas Built and stipulates that it cannot act as the employees’ representative unless it wins uncoerced majority support through a secret ballot election conducted by the NLRB.

“Jeff Ward’s principled stance in the face of a shameless UAW hierarchy has won relief for countless thousands of Freightliner employees,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “The UAW hierarchy initially tried to cut its losses at Thomas Built in the hopes of keeping their illegal agreement alive at other Freightliner facilities. They have now been forced to cease and desist company wide.”

“The sweetheart deal shows how eager union officials are to sell out the employees’ interests simply to get more union dues paying members.”

Bowing to pressure brought by UAW union operatives, Freightliner-Daimler Chrysler signed a so-called “neutrality agreement” that prohibited the traditional and less-abusive secret ballot election process. The company instead agreed to recognize the union on the basis of a majority of employees signing union authorization cards. Under the agreement, union organizers were given access to company facilities to browbeat workers into signing the cards.

Sacramento, CA (March 2, 2005) – National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed urgent formal comments with the California Public Employees Relations Board (PERB), calling on them to reject union lawyer’s arguments that would gut current regulations intended to protect employee rights against compulsory union dues.

The process originated when California Teachers Association (CTA) union officials, with the endorsement of numerous other powerful unions, suddenly proposed that the PERB eliminate most regulations that clearly define employees’ few remaining rights against compulsory union abuse.

The regulations were enacted by PERB in the 1980s to uphold the rights of teachers recognized by the Supreme Court in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, a case won by Foundation attorneys. CTA union officials in their “revisions” proposed to completely gut sections that require union officials to inform teachers of their Hudson due process rights to financial disclosure and to give notice of the right to object to union dues spent for non-collective bargaining activities, such as politics.

“Union officials want to eliminate access to the few constitutional protections teachers have in California against compulsory unionism abuse,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Rather than looking after the rights of the teachers they supposedly represent, union officials are simply trying to push through self-serving regulations.”

In their formal comments, Foundation attorneys point out that gutting the PERB regulations would “leave employees in the dark” about how to challenge union officials’ claims. One of the changes would force employees to first use their union’s stacked internal procedures to challenge the amount of the fees, a process that is heavily slanted to favor the union officials’ demand for higher dues. The changes would also eliminate compliance procedures which make violating agency fee regulations an unfair labor practice, and delete provisions that mandate chargeable fees be calculated by an independent audit of union expenditures.

Under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as articulated in the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, union officials must provide audited disclosure of their books and justify expenditures made from forced union dues seized from teachers who have chosen to refrain from union membership.

PERB officials have scheduled a hearing about the proposed regulations for March 3, 2005 in Sacramento.

Phoenix, AZ (February 28, 2005) — National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed arguments in the Arizona Court of Appeals opposing a union attack on Arizona’s Right to Work law.

The case originated in 2001 during contract negotiations between the City and officials of the AFL-CIO, Local 2384. Union officials wanted to force city employees to pay forced union fees equivalent to nearly 80% of full union dues.

When City officials refused to negotiate these “fees” on the grounds that they violated Arizona’s Constitution and Right to Work statutes, the union filed a complaint with the Phoenix Employee Relations Board (PERB). The case is now with the Arizona Court of Appeals.

Foundation attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief on Friday, supporting the City’s position that any form of forced dues violates state law. The Grand Canyon state’s highly popular Right to Work law protects all public employees and virtually all private-sector employees from being forced to join or support a union as a condition of employment.

The amicus brief points out that any forced dues, even if the amount is less than full membership dues, is a violation state law and the state constitution because it forces employees to support an unwanted union.

“Officials at the AFL-CIO are simply trying to sneak their way around state laws and the state constitution,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “They are looking for a ‘back door’ that will allow them to get a free ride on the backs of employees, instead going out and earning the voluntary support of rank-and-file workers.”

Arizona’s Right to Work law was enacted over 50 years ago and is so firmly a part of Arizona’s culture that it is part of the state’s constitution. In the unlikely event that union officials were to be victorious, it would effectively void not just the Right to Work law, but a constitutional provision as well.

High Point, North Carolina (February 25, 2005) – Facing intense employee opposition and pending unfair labor practice charges, United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials have agreed to pull up stakes at the massive Thomas Built Bus facility after having obtained recognition through the coercive “card check” process.

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys helped Thomas Built worker Jeff Ward file unfair labor practice charges early last year that led to issuance of a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) complaint against the company and union. The complaint alleged unlawful coercion during a “card check” drive and unlawful premature bargaining when a majority of employees had not yet chosen to unionize.

Although union and company officials are eager to sign a settlement agreement stipulating that UAW disclaims representation power over employees at the Thomas Built Bus facility, Ward is objecting to the settlement. He is asking the NLRB to void the entire “neutrality” or “card check” agreement negotiated by parent company Freightliner.

The UAW union’s controversial recognition as the monopoly representative of the facility’s workers has been in dispute since last year. NLRB prosecutors, based in Winston-Salem, agreed with employees’ contentions that union and company officials jointly conducted unlawful mandatory pro-union “captive audience speeches” to coerce the plant’s workers to sign union recognition cards. They also found that the “card check” agreement involved unlawful premature bargaining over substantive terms of employment.

“This victory is an encouraging step towards holding union officials across the country accountable for trampling workers’ rights under abusive ‘card check’ schemes,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason.

“But the UAW hierarchy is only cutting its losses at Thomas Built in the hopes of keeping their illegal ‘neutrality’ and ‘card check’ agreement alive so that they can continue to coerce workers at other Freightliner facilities into union ranks.”

Bowing to pressure brought by UAW union operatives, Freightliner-Daimler Chrysler signed the so-called “neutrality agreement” that includes a prohibition of the traditional and less-abusive secret ballot election process. The company instead agreed to recognize the union on the basis of a majority of employees signing union authorization cards. Under the agreement, union organizers were given full access to employees’ private personal information (including home addresses) and access to company facilities to browbeat workers into signing the cards.

Fairfield, Calif. (February 22, 2005) – A local employee of Anheuser Busch has filed a fourth round of federal charges against a recalcitrant Teamsters union Local for again violating the terms of a settlement agreement by failing to provide an audited statement detailing how workers’ forced union dues are spent.

Catherine Anderson, a part-time employee at Anheuser Busch’s Fairfield facility, filed the unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys. Teamsters union local 896 officials have repeatedly committed unfair labor practices and have reneged on settlement agreements.

Union officials recently provided workers with a financial “statement” consisting of pages 10-13 of a larger report on the union’s expenditures. These fragments are a “schedule” of expenses claiming an unsubstantiated 96.06% of union dues money was spent on “collective bargaining” costs. This “schedule” does not provide any financial disclosure to justify the affiliation fees with the Teamsters International union and two Teamsters International union councils. Teamsters officials also continue to claim that 100% of union staff salary and overhead costs are chargeable to nonmembers, even though the disclosure shows resources were spent on non-chargeable activities. Anderson’s complaint challenges both claims.

As a result of earlier federal charges filed by Anderson and a co-worker in July 2003, September 2004, and October 2004, Teamsters union local 896 officials settled the cases with a requirement that they properly inform workers of their right to refrain from financially supporting the union’s political and ideological causes. Teamsters officials had also agreed to cease illegal threats to have workers fired for refusal to pay excessive initiation fees and agreed to provide workers refraining from formal union membership “a precise and accurate statement” about the calculation of the forced union dues they could be legally compelled to pay.

“This Teamsters union hierarchy wants workers simply to shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The repeated attempts by union officials to run roughshod over workers’ rights show the inevitable greed and corruption that flow from forced unionism.”

The actions of Teamsters union officials violated worker protections recognized in the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Communications Workers v. Beck, a case argued and won by Foundation attorneys. Under the Beck ruling, workers may not be compelled to pay dues beyond the union’s proven collective bargaining costs, and they are entitled to an independent audit of union expenditures before any forced dues or fees are seized. Union officials also violated Penrod v. NLRB, which requires local union officials to provide financial disclosure for affiliated unions.

Old Saybrook, Connecticut (February 15, 2005) – Communications Workers of America (CWA) local 1298 officials have agreed to drop their illegal attempts to seize the wages of a local nonunion employee who continued to go to his job during a strike.

The agreement settles an unfair labor practice case filed at the Hartford-based National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) office by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys on behalf of Michael Beda, an employee of SBC Communications in Old Saybrook, Connecticut.

On April 5, 2004, Beda sent a letter to CWA union officials revoking his formal union membership. By resigning from formal union membership, non-union employees such as Beda are not subject to union rules and internal union discipline.

In May 2004, union officials ordered a strike at SBC Communications. Beda, not bound by union membership rules, continued going to work during the four day work stoppage. Beda later received a letter from CWA union officials stating that they were filing internal charges against him, and that he faced surrendering his wages earned during the strike despite the fact he was not a union member. Beda then filed the unfair labor practice charges.

In the settlement agreement, CWA union officials agree to rescind portions of their bylaws restricting employees’ right to resign their union membership, and retroactively recognize all resignations submitted by other workers to union officials since April 8, 2004.

“CWA union officials tried to make an example of Michael Beda just for going to work and doing his job,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “How dare they try to abscond his wages simply because he honored his commitments to his employer.”

The action of the union hierarchy clearly violated rights recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in NLRB v. Textile Workers and Pattern Makers v. NLRB. Under Textile Workers, it is an unfair labor practice for a union to fine employees who had been union members in good standing but who resigned during a lawful strike and thereafter returned to work during that strike. Under Pattern Makers and subsequent NLRB rulings, union officials are obligated to honor employees’ resignations from formal union membership.

“This union hierarchy’s disdain for workers’ freedom and economic security shows that, contrary to their claims, they do not have employees’ best interests at heart,” said Gleason.