27 Jun 2022

Hundreds of Minnesota Mayo Clinic Nurses Seek Vote to Free Themselves of Unwanted Union ‘Representation’

Posted in News Releases

Nurses signed decertification petition filed with Labor Board to end Minnesota Nurses Association officials’ monopoly bargaining powers

Mankato, MN (June 27, 2022) – Hundreds of healthcare workers at the Mayo Clinic Health System in Mankato, Minnesota have signed a petition seeking a vote on the removal of the Minnesota Nurses Association (MNA) union, affiliated with the National Nurses United. The workers’ decertification petition was filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 18 office in Minneapolis, MN with free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

Brittany Burgess, a registered nurse of the Mayo Clinic, filed the petition. The request seeking to end MNA union officials’ monopoly bargaining powers at the Mayo Clinic was signed by more than two hundred nurses in the bargaining unit, well over the number needed to trigger an NLRB-conducted secret ballot vote to remove the union.

Minnesota is not a Right to Work state, meaning workers can be forced to pay dues or fees to union officials as a condition of getting or keeping their jobs. If the workers’ vote is successful, MNA union officials will be stripped of their monopoly “representation” powers, including the ability to impose a forced dues requirement on the nurses in the bargaining unit.

National Right to Work Foundation legal aid has recently assisted workers in numerous successful decertification efforts across the nation, including workers in Kansas, Illinois, and Delaware. Because the NLRB has made the decertification process unnecessarily complicated, workers often need to turn to Foundation attorneys for free legal aid in navigating the process.

Foundation-advocated reforms to decertification elections that were adopted by the NLRB in 2020 have curtailed union officials’ abuse of so-called “blocking charges” to delay or block workers’ from exercising their right to decertify a union on the basis of unproven allegations made against an employer, often completely unrelated to workers’ desire to free themselves of the union. However, just days ago the Biden-appointed NLRB majority announced it was starting rulemaking to overturn those reforms and make it easier for union officials to block decertification votes no matter how many rank-and-file workers want a vote.

“Ms. Burgess and her coworkers, who provide lifesaving medical care to the people of Minnesota, should not have to be subjects of Minnesota Nurses Association union bosses whose so-called ‘representation’ they oppose,” commented National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “These nurses represent just one example in what has been a surge of decertification efforts over the past year, which makes it all the more outrageous that the Biden Board has announced it intends to give union bosses more power to block workers from exercising their statutory right to vote out unions they oppose.”

21 Jun 2022

National Right to Work Foundation Slams Decision Trapping Michigan Construction Workers in Unpopular Union

Posted in News Releases

NLRB rules that ballots employees already cast in vote to oust union cannot be counted, highlighting Labor Board’s pro-union boss bias

Washington, DC (June 21, 2022) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, DC, has permitted the destruction of hundreds of ballots already cast by Michigan Rieth-Riley Construction Company workers in an election whether to oust International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) union officials. The decision shuts down a years-long effort by Rieth-Riley employees to remove IUOE Local 324 officials, allowing the union to stifle the workers’ vote with questionable “blocking charges” against Rieth-Riley management.

Rieth-Riley employee Rayalan Kent led the effort to vote out IUOE union officials. With the assistance of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, he submitted two petitions in 2020 with enough worker support to trigger the NLRB’s administration of a “decertification vote.” A vote finally occurred in October 2020, but Regional NLRB officials in Detroit ruled, just hours before the ballots were to be counted, that union boss-concocted “blocking charges” invalidated the employees’ petition. The NLRB in Washington has now affirmed that decision.

Both rulings fly in the face of Foundation-backed reforms the NLRB adopted in 2020 regarding “blocking charges,” which provided that ballots in union decertification elections should be counted first before any unfair labor practice charges surrounding the election are dealt with. Moreover, even prior NLRB precedent required that an evidentiary hearing be held to determine whether there is any “causal nexus” between union allegations of employer misconduct and employee dissatisfaction engendering a union decertification effort. But the NLRB never held any such hearing in this case.

Settlements Foundation attorneys won in 2021 for Rieth-Riley employees Rob Nevins and Jesse London indicate that malfeasance by IUOE officials, not Rieth-Riley misdeeds, likely caused the company’s workers to push for the union’s ouster. London and Nevins decided to end their union memberships and keep working to support their families despite a union boss-ordered strike in 2019.

Nevins charged union officials with threatening to “blackball” him if he didn’t strike, and London reported that IUOE officials refused to hand over health insurance premium money they owed him for time he participated in the strike. The settlements mandated that IUOE union bosses not discriminate against London and Nevins for exercising their right to refrain from union membership, and also ordered them to pay London the health insurance premium money he was owed.

“The current decision demonstrates how the NLRB and its bureaucrats have twisted a law that is allegedly designed to protect the free choice rights of rank-and-file workers. Instead of supporting workers’ rights, this Board and past Boards have weaponized the National Labor Relations Act against workers solely to entrench union boss power,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Rather than apply the letter and spirit of the 2020 Election Protection rule, Joe Biden’s NLRB has undermined and rendered useless even those modest reforms. Given this awful ruling, it is now likely that Rieth-Riley workers’ votes to remove the union will simply be dropped in a trash can.”

Mix added: “Workers have a statutory right to vote out a union they oppose and NLRB bureaucrats should not be able to nullify that right on the basis of unproven and often unrelated allegations of employer misconduct.”

13 Jun 2022

Ascension Providence Rochester Hospital Lab Techs Secure Victory in Effort to Remove Unwanted Union

Posted in News Releases

After failing to block the vote using cynical legal arguments, OPEIU union officials ran away rather than face loss in decertification election

Rochester, MI (June 13, 2022) – Lab technicians at Ascension Providence Rochester Hospital in Michigan, have finally won their effort to be free of unwanted so-called” representation” by union officials of the Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) Local 40. After workers secured a decertification vote over union officials’ objections, the union disclaimed interest in representing the bargaining unit rather than face a vote of the workers they had claimed to “represent.”

Ascension workers Alyse Gschwender and Delaney Warren received free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys during the decertification process before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The petition for the vote to remove OPEIU officials, which signed by numerous Ascension lab technicians, was filed April 6, 2022, by Ms. Warren. After she took a position outside of the bargaining unit, Ms. Gschwender became the petitioner.

During the protracted process, Foundation staff attorneys successfully fought off OPEIU union lawyers’ efforts to block the vote cited the pending sale of the facility by Ascension to LabCorp as grounds for rejecting the workers’ request for an election. Union lawyers had urged the NLRB to block a vote whether to remove the union on the grounds of an upcoming “cessation of operations” by the employer, a policy previously applied only to certification elections.

In briefs to the NLRB Foundation staff attorneys countered that such grounds for blocking the vote were unjustified both as a matter of law and considering the facts of Ascension Providence Rochester Hospital’s announcement regarding the potential transfer of the operation to LabCorp. Foundation attorneys also noted that the attempt to block the vote was likely a cynical attempt to keep power over the bargaining unit, because if the sale ultimately went through the union would have likely sought to block a decertification vote citing the NLRB-created “successor bar” that insulates union officials from decertification votes after an employer’s change in ownership.

The Board rejected the union lawyers’ arguments and scheduled a decertification vote by mail-in ballot with the votes set to be counted later this month. However, rather than go forward with a vote they apparently knew they were going to lose, OPEIU officials instead disclaimed interest in the unit, finally giving the workers the freedom from unwanted union representation they sought.

Because Michigan is one of 27 states with Right to Work protections for private sector employees, unions cannot force workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs. However, even in Right to Work states union officials are empowered to impose monopoly representation on entire units of workers even over the objections of many workers within the unit, necessitating decertification elections to remove unwanted union “representation.”

“No worker anywhere should be forced under a union’s so-called ‘representation’ against their will. Foundation staff attorneys stand ready to provide legal aid to workers wanting to hold a decertification election to oust a union they oppose and believe they would be better off without,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “This case shows the lengths union lawyers will go to block workers from even holding votes to remove a union, even when union officials know that the vote will likely demonstrate that most workers want nothing to do with the union.”

6 Jun 2022

Worker Advocate Demands Department of Labor and Department of Justice Investigate Michigan SEIU Local’s “Serious Financial Malpractice”

Posted in News Releases

Michigan hospital workers seek to oust Healthcare Michigan union SEIU International recently put into trusteeship

Detroit, MI (June 6, 2022) – Today, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix formally asked the Department of Labor, the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney of Michigan, and the Office of Labor-Management Standards to investigate serious allegations of financial wrongdoing by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) affiliate Healthcare Michigan (HCMI). Foundation staff attorneys are providing free legal aid to workers at Sinai-Grace Hospital who are seeking a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decertification vote whether to remove HCMI officials from their workplace.

About the time the workers filed their second decertification petition to end the union’s so-called “representation” of the bargaining unit, the SEIU International announced it was putting the local into trusteeship due to serious and longstanding wrongdoing by local union officials. In her letter announcing the decision to take over the local, SEIU International President Mary Kay Henry concluded that there are “substantiated allegations of serious financial malpractice” and other issues of impropriety at HCMI.

Citing the SEIU’s trusteeship announcement, the National Right to Work Foundation President demanded that officials at the Department of Justice and Department of Labor also investigate HCMI union officials for illegally abusing their power, committing financial misdeeds, and possibly filing false reports with the Labor Department: “Any internal SEIU International investigation will be insufficient. There is a long history of union officials attempting to ignore or downplay corruption in their own ranks.”

The Sinai-Grace Hospital workers’ first petition seeking a vote to oust HCMI union officials was blocked after the NLRB sided with union lawyers in interpreting ambiguous union contract language to find that petition untimely. The sloppy contract language was negotiated by the union officials whom the SEIU International has now removed from power for, among other things, apparent malfeasance in properly accounting for how they spent workers’ dues money.

Undeterred by that NLRB ruling, the workers filed a second decertification petition after the contract with the vague language expired, again with sufficient number of signatures of Sinai-Grace Hospital employees to trigger the vote. NLRB Region 07 is expected to set dates to begin a decertification vote in the very near future.

“These latest developments show why these workers should not have been blocked in their earlier attempt to have a vote to oust HCMI from their workplace,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Union officials frequently look the other way when confronted with wrongdoing by others within the union hierarchy, so it is telling that even an SEIU International top boss says HCMI officials are unfit to run the local.”

“This situation demonstrates that it is time to end Big Labor’s government-granted power to impose its so-called ‘representation’ on workers who don’t want anything to do with a union,” continued Mix. “Rank-and-file workers should not have to navigate the NLRB’s labyrinth of rules for decertification elections just to escape an unwanted union, and individual workers should be allowed to decide for themselves whether to have a union represent them.”

1 Jun 2022

ATU Union Faces Trial for Union Officials’ Physical Assault, Illegal Retaliation Against DC-Area Transdev Driver

Posted in News Releases

National Labor Relations Board issued complaint against union for retribution campaign based in part on driver’s previous opposition to union in workplace

Washington, DC (June 1, 2022) – Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 689 is facing prosecution by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after a union shop steward attacked a Transdev driver campaigning for union office. The assaulted driver, Hyattsville-based Thomas McLamb, is receiving free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

McLamb filed charges with the NLRB in November 2021 and January 2022 against both ATU and Transdev for their roles in the retaliatory behavior, which also included his union-instigated termination. McLamb states that his previous opposition to the union in the workplace circa 2015 made him a target of union officials and adherents.

The NLRB issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing on May 11, affirming that the union’s actions as described by McLamb constituted violations of federal law. A trial before an NLRB Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) is now scheduled to take place beginning on June 21 in Washington, DC.

Union Steward Assaulted Driver After Union President Advised Followers to “Slap” Dissidents

In a statement filed in November 2021, McLamb said that the ATU Local 689 president, Raymond Jackson, had told other union officers to “slap” employees who were opposing his agenda. McLamb also reported that he had been physically assaulted by a shop steward. Both incidents occurred while McLamb was campaigning against the incumbent officers to serve on Local 689’s board.

The NLRB’s notice announcing a hearing in the case echoes McLamb’s charge, stating that “[o]n November 11, 2021…[union steward] Tiyaka Boone, at the Employer’s Hubbard Road facility, in the presence of employees, physically assaulted the Charging Party.”

McLamb reported in another federal charge that, shortly after this incident, ATU official Alma Williams demanded that Transdev management fire him. The NLRB’s notice of hearing affirms this accusation: “On November 11, 2021, Respondent, by Alma Williams, at the Employer’s Hubbard Road facility, requested that the Employer discharge the Charging Party.” On November 16, Transdev gave McLamb a letter stating that he had been placed on “Administrative Leave without pay” pending the outcome of an investigation.

Transdev later settled the charges against it by reinstating McLamb and paying him back wages for the period of his suspension.

NLRB Will Now Prosecute Union, but Driver May Still Be Forced to Fund Union Officials

McLamb’s opposition to the ATU union, which included attempts to gather support from his colleagues to remove it, is activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which guarantees workers’ right to “refrain from any or all of” union activities. McLamb argued in his charges that ATU and Transdev officials waged the November 2021 retaliation campaign against him because of his past engagement in such NLRA-protected “dissident” activities, and in that way infringed on his rights under the NLRA.

“No American employee should have to go to work thinking that they could be fired, mugged, or slandered merely for exercising their right to oppose union officials. The NLRB’s issuance of a complaint against the ATU in Mr. McLamb’s case is a small but significant step toward justice,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “However, due to Maryland’s lack of Right to Work protections for its private sector employees, Mr. McLamb is still required to sacrifice part of every paycheck to the same union hierarchy that is now facing prosecution for instigating violence against him.”

“Although we’re happy that the scales are finally tipping in Mr. McLamb’s favor, it’s unfortunately the reality in the 23 non-Right to Work states in the country that workers are forced to pay fees to union hierarchies that act against their interests, sometimes even violently so,” added Mix.

29 May 2022

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

Mountaire Farms Workers

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.

31 Mar 2022

Nurses at Massachusetts Hospital Move to Boot Union After Divisive Strike

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.

Union bosses caught red-handed illegally demanding dues from workers

Hospital Nurse Richard Avola

Many St. Vincent Hospital nurses reported the MNA union’s 300+ day strike was filled with bullying and division. “Do we want to keep the MNA and continue that same behavior?” asked Nurse Richard Avola on Spectrum News 1.

WORCESTER, MA – Earlier this year, hundreds of nurses at St. Vincent Hospital in Worcester, MA, backed a petition to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), demanding a vote to oust Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA) union officials from the facility. The effort followed a grueling, nearly year-long strike ordered by MNA bosses. As this issue of Foundation Action went to press, nurses were in the process of submitting ballots in the election.

Nurse Richard Avola submitted the petition to the NLRB in January. It contained enough employee signatures to trigger an NLRB-supervised decertification vote at the hospital. Soon after, he sought free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in defending the petition.

“People want change,” Avola told a Spectrum News 1 Worcester reporter in January about the push for a vote. “They want change for our patients.”

Protracted and Political Strike Rife with Intimidation, Many Nurses Report

Avola and his colleagues’ endeavor came after a 300-day strike ordered by MNA chiefs against the hospital — the longest strike in Massachusetts history. In response to inquiries from nurses impacted by the union bosses’ strike order, Foundation staff attorneys in March 2021 issued a legal notice informing St. Vincent nurses of their right to work during the strike and to cut off dues payments to the MNA hierarchy. The notice offered free legal aid to St. Vincent nurses who encountered union pushback in the exercise of their individual rights.

The union boss-ordered strike was intensely acrimonious. Union agents reportedly engaged in many harassing acts against nurses who exercised their right to continue working during the strike, including putting photographs of working nurses on strike paraphernalia and taking illicit pictures of nurses’ license plates. Despite the union-instigated campaign against rank-and-file nurses, high-profile elected officials, including U.S. Senators Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren, vocally sided against nurses who continued treating patients while exercising their right to rebuff the union strike demands.

MNA Union Agents Admitted to Illegally Demanding Union Dues During Strike

As the push for a vote to decertify MNA gained momentum, evidence emerged that union officials had demanded dues payments from nurses for periods during the strike when no contract existed between hospital management and the MNA union. Demanding dues during a contract hiatus is forbidden by longstanding federal law.

In response, St. Vincent nurse Regina Renaud hit the MNA union with Foundation-backed federal charges in January, maintaining that MNA agents had sent such illegal demands to her and other nurses. Just one day after Renaud filed her charges, MNA union officials effectively admitted their dues demands had breached federal labor law. They mailed hundreds of “error” letters to nurses dubiously claiming the illegal bills were an “oversight.” The union stated that it needed to “clean up” its records and warned that other similar demands might still go out to nurses.

While Renaud abstains from union membership, she is still forced to pay some dues to the union to keep her job because Massachusetts lacks Right to Work protections for private sector workers. However, this requirement does not exist in the absence of an active monopoly bargaining contract with a forced-dues clause. In Right to Work states, union membership and financial support are always strictly voluntary.

Ugly Strike and Illegal Dues Divide Nurses and Community

“It’s easy to see why Mr. Avola and so many of his coworkers want to oust MNA operatives from St. Vincent Hospital: Union bosses forced nurses to endure a gruelingly long strike that divided the hospital and the community, while those who went back to work and refused to abandon their patients faced harassment and intimidation tactics,” observed National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “Ms. Renaud’s charges show that MNA officials ignored even the most basic legal protections for workers who do not wish to financially support a union.”

“Foundation attorneys will continue to fight for St. Vincent nurses’ rights, including the right to dispense with unwanted union representation, and will ensure any MNA union boss legal tactics do not stifle the nurses’ voices,” Semmens added.

26 May 2022

Casino Worker Challenges Order Installing Unwanted Union via ‘Card Check’

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.

Ninth circuit panel signals willingness to end precedent allowing for imposition of union

Red Rock Casino workers vote against unionization, but nearly 2 years later judge ordered employer to bargain with union officials

NLRB officials stacked the deck against rank-and-file Red Rock Casino employees by imposing an unpopular union on them despite worker objections.

LAS VEGAS, NV – A large majority of the workers at Red Rock Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada voted “no” to unionization, but a federal district court judge ordered their employer to bargain with union officials anyway. Casino officials appealed, and Red Rock employee Raynell Teske supported their efforts to overturn the judge’s coercive order that overrides the choice workers made at the ballot box.

With free Foundation legal aid, Teske filed a brief arguing that the district judge had no reason to impose a union onto workers who had already soundly voted to reject it. A Ninth Circuit panel denied the initial appeal, but issued an unusual concurring opinion in which all three judges said they disagreed with that outcome, but were bound by Ninth Circuit precedent to uphold the district judge’s order.

Binding precedent can only be overturned through an en banc hearing before a larger Ninth Circuit panel. Red Rock lawyers filed for an en banc rehearing of their appeal. The court then ordered National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) lawyers defending the order to respond, another signal the judges may be willing to overturn this ridiculous precedent and rule in the workers’ favor. Teske filed a second amicus brief, urging the court to hear the case en banc.

Judge Overrides Workers’ Vote Against Union ‘Representation’

The situation at Red Rock began in December 2019, when the NLRB held a secret-ballot election on whether to unionize the Casino’s workers. Employees rejected union officials’ effort to become their monopoly bargaining “representatives” in an NLRB-supervised vote by a nearly 100-vote margin. Despite that outcome, NLRB Region 28 Director Cornele Overstreet sought a federal court injunction imposing the union over the workers’ objections.

On July 20, 2021, District Judge Gloria Navarro agreed with the NLRB Director’s request, and ordered Red Rock to bargain with union officials despite the employees’ vote against unionization. The judge said the order was justified because union officials claimed that, before the vote, a majority of workers had signed union authorization cards.

Teske’s amicus briefs argue those “Card Check” signatures don’t prove that union officials ever had majority support. She contends the level of union support was tested fairly by the secret-ballot election, in which workers voted 627-534 against unionization.

Her briefs point out that the NLRB and federal courts have long recognized that secret ballots are a more reliable way of gauging worker support for a union, because workers are often pressured, harassed, or misled by union organizers into signing cards.

Union officials know that Card Check signatures do not indicate solid worker support. The AFL-CIO admitted in its internal organizing handbook that it needed at least 75% Card Check support before having even a 50-50 chance of winning a secret-ballot election. Union bosses prefer Card Check unionization because they can more easily take control of workplaces where they lack popular support, and partisan NLRB appointees now are working to grant their wish.

Partisan NLRB Pushes Unreliable ‘Card Check’

Past legislative attempts to enact Card Check unionization, including the so-called “PRO Act,” pending in the U.S. Senate right now, faced bipartisan opposition. However, NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, a former high-ranking union lawyer, believes she can implement Card Check without congressional approval. Abruzzo has expressed interest in resurrecting a decades-old NLRB doctrine that allows unions to sue employers to try to force them to automatically bargain whenever the union possesses a pile of untested union cards.

“There is no reason why district court judges or NLRB bureaucrats should be able to override workers’ choice at the ballot box,” said National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “A favorable ruling for Raynell Teske and her colleagues could provide legal ammunition for future workers if the NLRB tries to force them to accept union officials for whom they never even had a chance to vote.”

10 Apr 2022

NYC Car Wash Workers Kick Out Unwanted RWDSU Union Officials

The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, January/February 2022 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.

Union bosses rejected by Alabama Amazon workers now ousted by car wash employees

Main Street Car Wash worker Ervin Par (center) and his colleagues in NYC thank their National Right to Work Foundation attorney for helping them secure a vote to remove unwanted RWDSU union bosses from their workplace.

Main Street Car Wash worker Ervin Par (center) and his colleagues in NYC thank their National Right to Work Foundation attorney for helping them secure a vote to remove unwanted RWDSU union bosses from their workplace.

NEW YORK, NY – In 2018, Ervin Par, an employee of Main Street Car Wash in Queens, NY, explained why he and his coworkers overwhelmingly wanted Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union (RWDSU) officials out of their workplace: “They just come and collect their fees, but I don’t see an economic benefit from the union.”

“Among my colleagues, there’s a majority that doesn’t want the union,” Par told Reason magazine in an interview at the time. Now, after a three-year effort to vote out RWDSU officials, Par and his coworkers have finally succeeded with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

Soon after Par submitted an October petition signed by enough of his coworkers to prompt the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to conduct an employee vote whether to eject the union, RWDSU officials filed paperwork ending their control over the facility. Notably, RWDSU union officials fled Main Street Car Wash before the NLRB had conducted the union decertification election for Par and his coworkers — likely in an attempt to avoid an embarrassing, overwhelming rejection in the vote.

Car Wash Employees Endured Years of Forced Dues, Union “Blocking Charges”

Par also rallied his coworkers in 2018 to oust the union, but their valid petition for a decertification election was thwarted by “blocking charges” from RWDSU officials. Because Par and his colleagues work in non-Right to Work New York, the delays meant that they were forced to pay dues to an unpopular union for almost three more years just to keep their jobs. In contrast, in Right to Work states all union financial support is strictly voluntary.

Par and his coworkers’ desire for freedom from union control is not uncommon. According to reports, in 2018 Main Street Car Wash was one of only six car washes in New York City still under union monopoly control, a number that had been declining following other union departures due to lack of employee support.

RWDSU Bosses Oppose Will of Rank-and-File Workers Across Country

The RWDSU is notably the same union that Bessemer, AL, Amazon employees rejected decisively during a highly publicized April 2021 union election. Despite that election loss, RWDSU officials are still trying to install themselves at the Bessemer facility. Litigation continues over whether RWDSU lawyers will nullify the workers’ vote in which barely 12% of eligible voters supported union bosses’ monopoly “representation.”

Atlanta, GA-area employees of water treatment company Ecolab have also recently received free Foundation legal assistance in their attempt to remove RWDSU officials.

“Mr. Par and his coworkers persevered for almost three years to end RWDSU union officials’ grip on power in their workplace,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “Although we’re glad the employees have finally been able to exercise their right to remove RWDSU, union officials should not have been able to manipulate the rules to stifle the decertification effort for so long.”

“RWDSU union officials have a penchant for challenging the will of the very employees they claim to ‘represent.’” Semmens added. “Workers across the country who seek to remove unwanted RWDSU presence in their workplace should contact the Foundation for free legal aid in exercising their rights.”

21 Apr 2022

UC Irvine Lab Assistant Beats CWA Bosses in Suit Fighting Anti-Janus Schemes

The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, January/February 2022 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.

Settlement secures full dues refund, ends phony photo ID restriction on Janus rights

Foundation President Mark Mix was quoted in a Los Angeles Times report on the filing of Amber Walker’s lawsuit, emphasizing how UC’s pro-union boss policies were designed to infringe on workers’ right to decide freely on union support.

IRVINE, CA – Just a few months after University of California Irvine lab assistant Amber Walker slammed them with a federal lawsuit, University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE-CWA) union officials have already backed off of defending schemes created to stop university employees from exercising their First Amendment right to stop union dues takings.

In November, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys won a settlement against UPTE officials requiring them to abandon their arrangement that required employees to provide a photo ID just to cut off unwanted union financial support. The settlement also made UPTE officials return to Walker dues they had seized from her wages under the scheme.

The lawsuit, filed by Foundation staff attorneys in August, challenged the use of a California statute that makes public employers completely subservient to union officials on dues issues. Union officials set up a system to stymie public employees’ right to stop dues payments that, according to Walker’s lawsuit, violated both due process and the First Amendment.

Lawsuit: Union Bosses Layered Two Schemes to Block Janus Rights

Walker sought to safeguard her First Amendment rights recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME decision. In Janus, the Court declared that forcing public sector workers to fund unions as a condition of employment violates the First Amendment. The Justices also ruled that union dues can only be taken from a public employee with an affirmative and knowing waiver of that employee’s First Amendment right not to pay.

“Before pursuing a lawsuit against UPTE, I tried to voice my concerns to many different officials in the union organization,” Walker told a Los Angeles Times reporter. “Many just ignored my plea and one official even raised their voice and rudely hung up the phone in my face . . . I believe it should not have taken a lawsuit to make UPTE respect my constitutional rights.”

Walker’s lawsuit explained that she sent UPTE union bosses a letter in January 2021 exercising her right to end her union membership and all union dues deductions from her wages. Walker submitted this message within a short union created “escape period” imposed to limit when workers can revoke dues deductions. The union bosses still rebuffed her request, telling her she needed to mail them a copy of a photo ID to effectuate her revocation. The photo ID requirement, clearly adopted to frustrate workers’ attempts to exercise their constitutional rights, is mentioned nowhere on the dues deduction card Walker had signed to initiate dues payments.

By the time UPTE officials had informed Walker that her request to cut off dues was rejected for lack of photo ID, the “window period” they enforce had already elapsed. Had Walker not filed a lawsuit with free Foundation legal aid, UPTE officials likely would have continued siphoning money from her paycheck for at least another year until the arrival of the next “window period.”

Rather than face Foundation staff attorneys in court, UPTE bosses backed down and chose to settle the lawsuit. The settlement requires UPTE officials to stop taking money from Walker’s paycheck and to refund any deductions they took after her initial attempt to exercise her Janus rights. They must also desist from enforcing the photo ID requirement.

The Foundation is aiding other public sector workers across the country in defending their First Amendment right to refuse union financial support.

Fight to Eliminate Pernicious Restrictions on Janus Continues at High Court

In October, Foundation staff attorneys filed two joint petitions urging the Supreme Court to take cases brought for Alaska, Oregon, and California public servants who are battling restrictive “escape period” schemes union bosses manipulated to stop them from opting out of supporting unwanted union activities (See Page 2).

“We at the Foundation are glad to have helped Ms. Walker reclaim dues that were illegally siphoned from her wages by UPTE union bosses, but hardworking public servants like Ms. Walker should not be forced to file federal lawsuits just to exercise their basic First Amendment rights of free association,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “The fact that UPTE bosses backed so quickly off defending their own suspect behavior indicates that they apparently knew their schemes would not stand up to any serious constitutional scrutiny.”