26 May 2025

Austin Worker Files 5th Foundation-Backed Lawsuit Arguing NLRB Violates US Constitution

The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, January/February 2025 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.

Case joins others for employees nationwide arguing Labor Board’s structure is illegal

Dallas Mudd helps connect people with the social services they need, and his and many other workers’ ability to do their important work shouldn’t be stymied because unaccountable NLRB bureaucrats are forcing union “representation” on them.

AUSTIN, TX – In November, Dallas Mudd, an employee for online social service coordination platform Findhelp, filed a federal lawsuit against the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on the grounds that the agency’s structure is unconstitutional. Mudd’s case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, is the latest in a series of legal actions by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys for employees challenging the NLRB’s authority.

Mudd’s case comes after he filed a decertification petition with the NLRB, seeking a vote to remove the Office & Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) from his workplace. However, NLRB officials blocked the vote, disenfranchising Mudd and his colleagues on the basis of unproven charges union bosses made against Findhelp. Mudd appealed the decision to the full NLRB in Washington, D.C., while also filing a federal lawsuit to challenge NLRB members’ removal protections.

Shortly after the lawsuit was filed, Mudd’s Foundation attorney also asked the Northern District Court of Texas to issue a preliminary injunction stopping the NLRB from adjudicating his appeal until the issue of the NLRB’s constitutionality is resolved. Mudd argues that he is suffering ongoing and irreparable harm by being forced to navigate a statutory process before an agency that he claims is unconstitutionally structured.

Constitutional Challenge: A Broader Legal Campaign

Meanwhile, in its own case against the NLRB, Findhelp has successfully secured an injunction against the NLRB in a federal district court making arguments similar to those raised by Mudd.

Mudd’s lawsuit follows four other constitutional challenges backed by the National Right to Work Foundation, targeting the NLRB’s structure. This includes a case for New York Starbucks employees Ariana Cortes and Logan Karam, who filed the first constitutional challenge to NLRB Board Member protections.

Their case is currently being briefed at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, but since their groundbreaking lawsuit, numerous major employers have utilized the arguments first made in federal court by Foundation staff attorneys to challenge the radically pro-union boss BidenHarris NLRB.

“Independent-minded workers should not be forced to depend on biased agencies staffed by bureaucrats who exercise power in violation of the Constitution,” said National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens.

“The Constitution does not permit a powerful federal agency to operate as the judge, jury, and executioner without proper oversight.

“Contrary to the wishes of Big Labor bosses, federal labor law is not exempt from the requirements of the U.S. Constitution,” added Semmens.

20 May 2025

Hundreds of Sunoco Logistics Drivers Across TX, OK, LA, and NM Free Themselves From Steelworkers Union

Posted in News Releases

Majority of drivers across large work unit backed petition to send USW union bosses packing

Washington, DC (May 20, 2025) – Crude oil drivers for Sunoco Logistics Partners (also known as Energy Transfer) have successfully forced unpopular United Steelworkers (USW) union bosses out of their work unit. The victory for workers comes after Jay Fifer, a driver for the oil transportation company, gathered signatures from the majority of his coworkers on a petition demanding that Sunoco Logistics officials end their recognition of the USW union as the majority “representative” of the drivers.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) acknowledged Sunoco Logistics’ withdrawal of recognition from the USW union on May 12. As the result of Fifer and his coworkers’ effort, over 420 drivers from around 30 Sunoco Logistics facilities across Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and New Mexico are free of the union’s control.

“I’m glad that my coworkers and I were able to band together to force this Steelworkers union out,” commented Fifer. “The union was not a positive force in our workplace, and we are better off without it. I am lucky to live in the Right to Work state of Texas where I could at least choose to stop sending my money to this union while it was still in power, but unfortunately the same can’t be said for all of my fellow drivers.”

The NLRB is the agency charged with enforcing federal labor law in the private sector, which includes administering votes to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Thanks to the 2019 Foundation-won Johnson Controls NLRB decision, workers who want to remove unwanted union officials can also do so by submitting a majority-backed petition asking their employer to stop recognizing the union. If there is a dispute about the petition, the NLRB can administer a secret-ballot vote to test the employees’ opposition to the union.

Fifer lives in Texas, a Right to Work state barring union bosses from enforcing contracts that require employees to pay dues or fees to union officials as a condition of keeping their jobs. Oklahoma and Louisiana are also Right to Work states, but Sunoco Logistics drivers in New Mexico do not have the benefit of Right to Work protections and can be forced to sacrifice part of their paychecks to union bosses or be fired. However, in both Right to Work and non-Right to Work states, federal law lets union officials impose their monopoly “representation” on all workers in a work unit, regardless of whether they support the union or not.

Rank-and-File Oil Truck Drivers Gathered Hundreds of Signatures in Favor of Removing USW

Fifer’s effort to remove the USW union kicked off when he began collecting signatures on a petition asking the NLRB to administer a union removal (or “decertification”) vote at his workplace. Fifer easily met the 30% signature threshold needed to trigger such an election under NLRB rules. However, soon after the NLRB scheduled a decertification vote to take place over a range of dates in May, Fifer’s petition gained even more traction and soon garnered support from a majority of the work unit.

Fifer opted to submit his petition to his employer, who withdrew recognition from the USW union in accordance with the Johnson Controls decision. USW union officials are now stripped of their monopoly bargaining power and can no longer enforce bargaining obligations against Sunoco Logistics.

Foundation staff attorneys have helped several groups of workers exercise their right to remove unwanted USW unions within the last few years, including healthcare workers in Minnesota, metal workers in Pennsylvania, chemical employees in Louisiana, building products employees in New Jersey, and more. Across the country, workers’ desire to exercise their right to vote out unpopular union bosses is increasing: Worker-filed petitions seeking union decertification votes are up more than 50% from 2020, according to NLRB data.

“Rank-and-file workers across the country like Mr. Fifer and his fellow drivers don’t enjoy the same structural and legal advantages that union officials do under American labor law. That makes it all the more impressive that he and his colleagues were able to gather signatures across a huge work unit and break free of the Steelworkers union’s control,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “American workers’ increasing interest in escaping union ‘representation’ should serve as a reminder to the Trump Administration that it should pursue labor policy that enhances workers’ freedom to escape unwanted union affiliation.”

15 May 2025

Federal Appeals Court Hears Arguments in Starbucks Baristas’ First-In-The-Nation Suit Challenging Constitutionality of NLRB

Posted in News Releases

Trump Administration is relying on similar arguments in another lawsuit defending its removal of Biden appointee from labor board

Washington, DC (May 15, 2025) – Today, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia heard oral arguments in Cortes v. NLRB, a federal case in which New York-based Starbucks employees are challenging the structure of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) as unconstitutional. The baristas, Ariana Cortes and Logan Karam, are receiving free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

Cortes and Karam’s case, originally filed in 2023, was the first in the nation to advance the argument that NLRB board members’ removal protections – which insulate members of the federal labor board from accountability to the President except on very rare occasions – violate separation of powers doctrines in Article II of the Constitution. Since Foundation attorneys filed the baristas’ case, the Trump Administration advanced the same arguments to remove Biden NLRB Member Gwynne Wilcox from the Board, which is now the subject of ongoing litigation.

National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix issued the following statement on the oral arguments:

“Ms. Cortes and Mr. Karam stand up for untold numbers of workers around the country in their battle to reform the NLRB. For nearly a century, the federal labor board’s structure has let unelected bureaucrats grant their union boss cronies massive power over the nation’s workers, all while gutting workers’ right to decide freely for themselves whether or not union association is right for them.

“Nothing in Supreme Court case law permits a blatantly partisan agency like the NLRB to operate free of virtually any accountability to the elected President. While we’re glad that the Trump Administration is now fighting the NLRB’s unconstitutional structure as well, it should be remembered that behind every labor case and policy are American workers like Ms. Cortes and Mr. Karam, who deserve to have their rights adjudicated before an agency that is in harmony with the Constitution.”

The D.C. Circuit Court will hear Wilcox v. Trump, the case in which the Trump Administration is defending its decision to remove Gwynne Wilcox from the Board, tomorrow, May 16.

Starbucks Baristas’ Federal Case Began After Biden NLRB Disenfranchised Workers

On April 28, 2023, Cortes submitted a petition, supported by a majority of her colleagues, asking the NLRB to hold a decertification election at her Buffalo-area “Del-Chip” Starbucks store to remove SBWU union officials’ bargaining powers over workers. However, NLRB Region 3 rejected Cortes’ petition, citing unfair labor practice accusations made by SBWU union officials against the Starbucks Corporation. Notably, there was no established link between these allegations and the employees’ decertification request.

Similarly, Karam filed a decertification petition seeking a vote to remove the union at his Buffalo-area Starbucks store. Like Cortes’ petition, NLRB officials refuse to allow the vote to take place, citing claims made by SBWU officials. As a result, the workers remain trapped under union “representation” they oppose. This led Cortes and Karam to file their own federal lawsuit – the first in the nation challenging the NLRB’s structure as unconstitutional as a whole.

8 May 2025

Chicago-Area Chemical Plant Worker Asks National Labor Board to End Policy Letting Union Bosses Trap Workers in Unions

Posted in News Releases

Employees submitted valid petition requesting vote to remove Teamsters union, but union bosses manipulated unproven charges against employer to block vote

Chicago, IL (May 8, 2025) – An employee of Rowell Chemical Corporation, a chemical plant based in Willow Springs, is asking the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to overturn a regional labor board’s decision blocking a vote to remove the Teamsters Local 710 union. The worker, Jeffrey Johnston, is receiving free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

The NLRB, based in Washington, D.C., is the federal agency responsible for administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions, as well as adjudicating disputes between employers, union officials, and individual employees. Johnston’s Request for Review argues that regional NLRB officials blocked his and his coworkers’ requested union removal vote based on dubious “blocking charges” Teamsters union officials filed against Rowell management.

Union officials often file blocking charges to delay or cancel union decertification votes, despite the fact that their charges are often unproven and have little, if any, connection to the reasons workers cite for wanting to get rid of a union. The NLRB in 2020 adopted Foundation-backed reforms that gave workers a chance to vote before the agency handled litigation related to the election, but the Biden NLRB adopted a new rule in 2024 that lets union officials manipulate blocking charges to stop election proceedings completely.

 Request for Review: NLRB “Blocking Charge” Policy Violates Multiple Federal Laws

Johnston’s Request for Review contends that the NLRB should eliminate the Biden-era rule permitting blocking charges and schedule a union decertification election for him and his coworkers as soon as possible. Johnston argues that holding up an election pursuant to blocking charges violates the text of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the statute that the NLRB is supposed to enforce, which states that a decertification election should occur if there is a question concerning representation. Johnston also argues that the Biden-era rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) on multiple grounds.

At the very least, Johnston’s Request for Review maintains, the NLRB should hold a hearing into whether the employer misconduct alleged by Teamsters union officials actually has a connection to Johnston and his coworkers’ desire to kick the union out. The regional NLRB did not order such a hearing and simply blocked the vote.

“My coworkers and I requested a vote to remove this union almost two months ago and somehow the NLRB is letting Teamsters bosses throw around specious charges to stop us from doing so,” commented Johnston. “My coworkers and I have spent two years under Teamsters control, and I believe that the vast majority of us agree that the Teamsters don’t represent our interests. It’s not fair that union bosses and the NLRB can trump our free choice.”

“The NLRB, through its ‘blocking charge’ rule has let union officials stifle the rights of the very workers they claim to ‘represent’ in violation of the statute the NLRB is supposed to enforce,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Mr. Johnston speaks for workers across the country in challenging this NLRB-invented policy, which is completely antithetical to the idea expressed in federal labor law that employees should choose the union, not the other way around.”

 

28 Apr 2025

Employee of LAX Foodservice Provider Slams Unite Here Local 11 With Federal Charges Detailing Intimidation, Harassment

Posted in News Releases

Charge describing heated clash comes just months after a coworker charged UNITE HERE Local 11 with inciting mob to demand termination

Los Angeles, CA (April 28, 2025) – An employee of Flying Food Group, a foodservice provider to commercial flights at Los Angeles International Airport, has hit the Unite Here Local 11 union with federal charges. The employee, Kenia Solano, maintains that union officials and agents have targeted her with harassment, intimidation, and even physical confrontation over her opposition to the union’s control. Solano filed her charges at National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 21 with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

“Unite Here has been a terrible presence in our workplace. Our contracts are bad and union representatives treat me and anyone who disagrees even a little bit with the union like we are evil,” commented Solano. “The law is supposed to protect my right to disagree with the union and tell my coworkers that we are better off without it, but union bosses have not respected those rights at all and just keep harassing me.”

The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, which includes adjudicating disputes between management, union officials, and individual employees. NLRB officials are now reviewing Solano’s charge. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which governs labor relations in the private sector, forbids both union officials and employers from retaliating against employees who speak up for or against union control.

Unite Here Steward Intimidation Tactics Built Up to Physical Confrontation

Solano’s charges state that she has been a “vocal critic of the union since June 2024” and has held meetings or talked to other employees to persuade them of Unite Here’s bad influence on the workplace. “Because of her dissident activities, [Solano] has been the constant target of harassment, bullying, and retaliation or attempted retaliation by the Union through its agents and representative,” the charges read.

The charges go on to explain that Unite Here shop stewards are manipulating other employees into isolating Solano because of her opposition to the union, and have even told workers without evidence that Solano’s activities will end up costing them their jobs.

The hostility created by Unite Here union officials reached a boiling point in December 2024 when “[u]nion shop steward Esperanza Montes aggressively seized a…washing bin from [Solano] and violently threw it on the ground,” the charges state. Later that same day, after Solano reported the clash to her supervisor, the supervisor witnessed Montes again berate Solano over her dissent from the union.

“[Unite Here]…has attempted to restrain and coerce [Solano] in the exercise of her rights…and has retaliated against Charging Party for engaging in protected activity under the Act,” Solano’s charges argue.

Other Flying Foods Worker Reports Union-Incited Mob Demanded Her Firing

Unite Here Local 11 is already under federal investigation for violating workers’ rights at Flying Foods. Employee Esperanza Maciel filed charges against Local 11 in September 2024 after a union organizer illegally incited a mob of employees in an attempt to get her fired.

Solano’s and Maciel’s charges come as Foundation attorneys are aiding foodservice and hospitality workers across the country in challenging illegal tactics from Unite Here union officials, including threatening organizing tactics and refusal to respect workers’ rights to refrain from dues payment. Two such workers, Maria Uriostegui and Erika Chavez, hotel workers in Chicago and San Francisco respectively, were recently featured in a Foundation mini-documentary titled “The Reality of Union Bullying by UNITE HERE” which recently surpassed 1.6 million views on YouTube:

“Unite Here Local 11 officials may as well change the union’s name to ‘Unite Here or else,’” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “While it’s bad enough that multiple employees from the same foodservice facility are reporting mob-like tactics against workers who oppose the union’s agenda, the truth is that Unite Here officials have a track record of using illegal and intimidating methods to coerce worker ‘support’ in countless hotels, stadiums, casinos, and other workplaces across the nation.

“Foodservice and hospitality workers nationwide should know that they have rights to end union membership, speak out against union bosses, and refuse to pay some or potentially all union dues without having to fear retaliation,” Mix added. “Foundation attorneys stand ready to help them exercise their rights.”

21 Apr 2025

Energy Transfer Drivers Across Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana Demand Vote to Remove Steelworkers Union From Power

Posted in News Releases

Hundreds of employees of oil and gas transportation company could be free from union’s grip if vote goes forward

Washington, DC (April 21, 2025) – Drivers for Energy Transfer, an oil and gas transportation company with nearly 30 facilities across Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana, are petitioning a federal labor board for a vote to end United Steelworkers (USW) union officials’ bargaining control over their work unit.

Driver Jay Fifer, who is based at Energy Transfer’s workplace in Hearne, TX (near College Station, TX), submitted the petition to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) this week with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. If Fifer and his coworkers’ requested vote is successful, over 420 Energy Transfer drivers will be free of USW union officials’ control.

The NLRB is the agency charged with enforcing federal labor law in the private sector, which includes administering votes to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Fifer’s petition contains signatures from his coworkers well in excess of the percentage required by the NLRB to trigger a union decertification vote within his work unit. The NLRB will now review Fifer’s petition.

Right to Work laws in Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana prohibit USW union officials from enforcing contracts that require Energy Transfer drivers to pay union dues or fees just to get or keep a job. In contrast, in non-Right to Work states, union officials can force workers to pay dues or fees on pain of termination. However, in both Right to Work and non-Right to Work jurisdictions, USW union officials can still impose monopoly bargaining contracts over every employee in a work unit, whether or not they voted for or support the union. As Fifer’s case demonstrates, union-controlled work units can often span hundreds of workers in different cities or even across state lines.

“Support among us drivers for this Steelworkers union is very low where I work. My colleagues at other locations have said similar things as well. It’s not fair for Steelworkers officials to dictate major things about our work lives when very few drivers at all are union members,” commented Fifer. “I filed this petition because I firmly believe that the overwhelming majority of my coworkers don’t think this union represents us, and we hope the NLRB lets us exercise that right without any delays.”

Workers Across Country Increasingly Seeking Exit from Union Control

Foundation staff attorneys have helped several groups of workers oust unwanted USW unions within the last few years, including healthcare workers in Minnesota, metal workers in Pennsylvania, chemical employees in Louisiana, building products employees in New Jersey, and more. Across the country, workers’ desire to exercise their right to vote out unpopular union bosses is increasing: Worker-filed petitions seeking union decertification votes are up more than 50% from 2020, according to NLRB data.

“American workers should not have to accept the ‘representation’ of a union that lacks worker support in the workplace, and more and more workers are standing up to free themselves,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “That’s why it’s important that they be able to freely exercise their right to vote to remove a union, a right that unfortunately was consistently under attack under the previous Administration’s National Labor Relations Board.

“As President Trump seeks new appointees for the NLRB, he should remember that workers all over the country like Mr. Fifer and his colleagues believe they are better off free from union influence, and those workers deserve to have their voices and will respected,” Mix added.

16 Apr 2025

Ascension St. Agnes Nurse Slams NNOC Union With Federal Charges After Union Restricts Workplace Vote

Posted in News Releases

Nurse contends that union is discriminating against nonmember nurses and violating duty of fair representation

Baltimore, MD (April 16, 2025) – A nurse at Ascension Health’s St. Agnes Hospital has hit the National Nurses Organizing Committee (NNOC) union with federal charges, maintaining that union officials are discriminating against nonmembers as a vote on workplace issues approaches. The nurse, Jen Delaney, filed the unfair labor practice charge at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law and adjudicating disputes between employers, union officials, and individual employees. Delaney details in her charges that NNOC union officials are forbidding nurses who are not formal union members, like herself, from voting on a “partial deal” that is part of a wider contract negotiation. The union is restricting the voting pool despite the fact that the union monopoly contract will impose conditions on all nurses at the facility, members and nonmembers alike.

Delaney is arguing that NNOC union officials are violating the “duty of fair representation,” a legal mandate that requires union officials not to discriminate in its bargaining functions, including on the basis of union membership. The duty originates from a 1944 Supreme Court case, Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railway Co., in which the Court recognized that rail union bosses were manipulating their powers over the workplace to discriminate against African-American railway workers.

Because Maryland lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, NNOC union officials can impose working conditions on the nurses that require them to pay union dues or fees just to keep their jobs. In contrast, in Right to Work jurisdictions like nearby Virginia and West Virginia, union membership and all union financial support are the choice of each individual worker.

“NNOC union officials have been extremely abrasive to any nurse who isn’t gung-ho for the union’s agenda,” commented Delaney. “It wasn’t long ago that my coworkers and I backed an effort to try to vote this union out, and this new development shows exactly why. NNOC union bosses are freezing out nurses from the voting process who are unwilling to sign a membership form that states it is ‘voluntary,’ yet they require signatures to vote, even though that vote is going to have very significant consequences for all of us at St. Agnes.”

Federal Charges Follow Nurses’ Attempt to Vote Union Out

Delaney led an effort to “decertify” (or remove) the NNOC union earlier this year. Delaney and her coworkers reported that union officials made taking care of patients more difficult and that the union generally served as a divisive force in the workplace.

“NNOC union officials are clearly not interested in ‘representing’ all nurses at St. Agnes, and have instead actively discriminated against nurses who are critical of the union’s priorities and who have exercised their legally-protected right to reject formal union membership,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “While this is a violation of the duty of fair representation, it exposes a more fundamental problem with federal labor law: Union officials shouldn’t have the power to foist their ‘representation’ on workers who have disaffiliated with the union to begin with, and certainly shouldn’t have the ability to force those same dissenting workers to subsidize a union they don’t want and never asked for.”

1 Feb 2025

AT&T Workers Nationwide Win Challenges to Unionization Imposed Through Card Check

The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, November/December 2024 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.

Victories by AT&T workers in five states preceded Biden-Harris NLRB rule change to block secret ballot votes

AT&T Workers Foundation Action Newsletter

See You, CWA: Marquita Jones (left), Samantha Cain (middle), and Matthew Gonzalez rallied their fellow AT&T workers to escape unwanted CWA unions.

WASHINGTON, DC – While the Biden-Harris National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) sought to upend NLRB rules designed to protect workers’ ability to vote out unwanted unions, AT&T workers across the country won a series of victories highlighting the importance of allowing workers to challenge coercive union card check unionization with secret ballot votes. The decertification victories all relied on the National Right to Work Foundation-backed 2020 NLRB “Election Protection Rule” (EPR), which was formally eliminated by the Biden-Harris Labor Board in September.

In five separate cases covering well over 1,000 workers, AT&T Mobility employees have successfully overturned Communications Workers of America (CWA) unionization imposed through the notorious “card check” process.

Under card check, union organizers bypass the secret ballot election process and instead collect cards face-to-face from employees that are then counted as “votes” for the union. Without the privacy of a secret ballot vote, many workers report being pressured, bullied, or threatened into signing, which is among the reasons why card check has long been recognized as inherently unreliable and abuse-prone.

Foundation-Backed 2020 Rule Let Over 1,000 AT&T Workers Nix Union Card Checks

The 2020 Election Protection Rule reformed several rules that union officials manipulate to trap workers under monopoly “representation,” including by giving employees a way to challenge card check unionization with a secret ballot election. Foundation staff attorneys assisted AT&T employees in five states to do that in advance of the Biden-Harris Labor Board’s cynical repeal of the rule.

First, in Tennessee, AT&T employee Denis Hodzic filed a petition signed by two-thirds of his coworkers in the unit seeking a secret-ballot vote to remove the CWA union, after CWA agents installed themselves over 100 AT&T In-Home Experts by card check. Initially CWA union officials argued the election should be permanently blocked because the union had already merged the workers into a larger bargaining unit with thousands of other AT&T workers.

CWA Bosses Capitulated to AT&T Workers

However, citing the Election Protection Rule, which gives workers at least 45 days to challenge a card check with a decertification petition, Foundation staff attorneys were able to win a ruling with the NLRB allowing the vote to proceed. At that point CWA officials chose not to even contest the vote, instead filing paperwork with the NLRB freeing the employees from CWA ranks apparently to avoid an overwhelming final vote against the union.

“The Election Protection Rule was essential for us to rely on as we went through the process of seeking resolution to our tricky situation,” Hodzic said of his situation. “The 45-day petition window needs to remain regardless of which group holds the majority position in Washington.”

Since then, with legal aid, around 1,000 additional AT&T Mobility employees in California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas have all also successfully removed the CWA union following installation through card check. In all four states, once the decertification vote became inevitable, CWA officials simply conceded defeat rather than wait for the results of a formal decertification vote.

NLRB Repeal of Election Protection Rule Traps Workers in Union Ranks

Despite these efforts from independent-minded employees, the Biden-Harris NLRB formally repealed the Election Protection Rule in September, dramatically expanding union bosses’ ability to block employee-requested decertification votes.

As a result, now, when workers in Hodzic’s situation attempt to challenge a card check with a secret ballot decertification, the NLRB will automatically block their vote for up to one year after a card check, which opens the door to countless other union delay tactics.

“If these AT&T employees had filed their five decertification petitions after September 30th, they would have been trapped in a union they oppose for years and likely forever,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens.

“This is yet another example of the Biden-Harris NLRB steamrolling the rights of independent-minded employees, so union bosses can expand their forced dues ranks. “Despite this setback for employee freedom, Foundation staff attorneys remain committed to helping workers trapped in union ranks they oppose,” added Semmens. “That includes helping them navigate the increasingly rigged NLRB system.”

31 Jan 2025

Massachusetts Trader Joe’s Employees Battle Divisive Union Organizing Campaign

Posted in News Releases

Trader Joe’s workers demand vote to oust union, blast union bosses in Congress and media

Trader Joe’s employees Les Stratford Michael Alcorn

Trader Joe’s employees Les Stratford (left) and Michael Alcorn want to restore the fun and independent work environment that existed in the store before union officials sowed discord.

HADLEY, MA – Union bosses and Big Labor-allied media cheered when the Hadley, MA, branch of supermarket chain Trader Joe’s became the first unionized location in the country in 2022. But what all their celebration concealed was the fact that union officials had swept to power at the location through a deeply deceptive campaign that demonized both the company and many employees. Now many of the Hadley-based Trader Joe’s employees are fighting to kick the union out.

“Officials of this union have sowed division and smeared both our workplace and anyone who dissents from the union’s agenda pretty much from the time the campaign began to unionize the store,” Trader Joe’s employee Les Stratford told Supermarket News about the situation.

Michael Alcorn, another Hadley Trader Joe’s worker who simply wanted to have a conversation with his coworkers about the ramifications of unionizing, said that union militants “weren’t going to have a meeting with us…immediately it was like ‘you either accept the union, or you don’t, and we’re not going to talk about it all together because if you don’t accept it, we don’t trust you.’”

Now, with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, Stratford, Alcorn, and many other Hadley Trader Joe’s employees are backing an effort to vote the union out of power at the store. Stratford in August submitted a union decertification petition asking the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to hold an election among his coworkers on whether to remove the union, which contained well over the support needed to trigger a decertification vote under NLRB rules.

Because Massachusetts lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, the union has the legal privilege to enforce contracts that require Trader Joe’s employees to pay dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs.

In Right to Work states, in contrast, union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary. A vote by the majority of Hadley Trader Joe’s employees against the union would free them from both the union’s forced-dues and monopoly bargaining powers.

Trader Joe’s Employee Exposes Union Tactics on Capitol Hill

In May, Alcorn brought the concerns many of the Hadley Trader Joe’s employees had directly into the halls of Congress when he was called by the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce to testify about coercive tactics union bosses use to gain power and stay in power.

In addition to describing the union’s vilification of any skeptical employee, he noted that union organizers tried to foist union control of the workplace through “card check” — a process that bypasses the NLRB’s secret ballot election system and lets union officials aggressively solicit “cards” that are later counted as votes for the union.

Union organizers also “made inaccurate and incomplete press releases, creating false narratives about our workplace to promote their own agenda and personal vendettas,” Alcorn said.

Workers Need More Freedom to Oust Abrasive Union Bosses

The Hadley Trader Joe’s workers’ efforts come as the Biden-Harris NLRB announced a final rule which will make it much harder for rank-and-file workers to exercise their right to vote out union officials they oppose. The final rule, among other things, lets union officials prevent decertification votes from going forward by filing unverified “blocking charges” alleging employer interference.

While the Trader Joe’s employees’ petition will be unaffected by the rule change, the new policy will likely quash or substantially delay similar efforts in the future. “The situation at the Hadley, MA, Trader Joe’s store shows exactly why workers’ right to vote to remove a union they oppose must be protected,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Legal Director and Vice President William Messenger.

“During a union campaign, union officials often employ aggressive tactics and ‘us vs. them’ or hate-the-boss rhetoric that cause division and prioritize union bosses’ agenda over workers’ freedoms and individual choices.

“That the Biden-Harris Administration stripped workers of what few rights they had to challenge union officials that perpetrate these acts shows they are on the side of Big Labor, not individual workers,” Messenger added.

28 Mar 2025

Third AT&T-BellSouth Worker Hits CWA Union With Federal Charges, Challenges Thousands in Illegal Strike Fines

Posted in News Releases

Newest charge challenges union boss $5,300 strike fine demand, while other workers challenge CWA union officials’ restrictive dues collection tactics

Miami, FL (March 28, 2025) – Henry Gonzalez, an employee of AT&T-BellSouth in Miami, has just hit the Communications Workers of America (CWA) union in his workplace with federal charges – the third worker to do so in just a month. Gonzalez’s charges, which were filed at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, describe how CWA union officials are wrongfully targeting him with thousands of dollars in disciplinary fines for not participating in a strike.

The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law and investigating and prosecuting unfair labor practices. Under federal labor law, union officials can mete out internal strike discipline only on employees who are formal members of the union. A worker who ends his union membership before exercising his right to continue working during a strike action cannot be punished by the union hierarchy. Gonzalez maintains that he resigned his union membership, yet union bosses still slammed him afterward with illegal fines in excess of $5,000.

In addition to preventing union bosses from imposing discipline on workers who have abstained from union membership, federal labor law and U.S. Supreme Court decisions like NLRB v. General Motors protect workers’ right to freely maintain or end union membership.

Freedom to resign union membership is also protected at the state level in Florida by the state’s Right to Work protections, which forbid union officials from forcing private sector workers to join or pay union dues or fees just to keep their jobs. This is in contrast to forced-unionism states, in which union bosses can require all employees in a workplace, even those who are not union members or who are otherwise opposed to the union, to financially support some union activities.

Within the past month, Miami-based AT&T-BellSouth employees Sofia Hernaiz and Amanda Marc have also filed unfair labor practice charges against the CWA union. Hernaiz and Marc, who have also opted out of union membership, both maintain that union officials are enforcing confusing “window periods” that restrict to just a few days per year when workers can revoke their consent to union dues deductions. Marc’s charge maintains that window periods violate federal labor law because they force unwilling workers to subsidize unwanted unions. Hernaiz’s charge also reports unlawful post-strike discipline similar to Gonzales’.

“Principled, independent-minded workers at AT&T-BellSouth are increasingly deciding that they will not take CWA union officials’ arbitrary restrictions and coercive ‘discipline’ sitting down,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Big Labor union bosses and their cronies on the NLRB have for decades been trying to contort federal labor law to favor their own power and influence over workers’ freedom, especially during the Biden Administration. Foundation-backed workers in Florida and across the nation are fighting to reverse this trend.”