Right to Work Foundation Attorneys Move to Disqualify Controversial Recess Appointees from Six Cases

Argue Labor Board does not have legitimate quorum to hear pending cases

Washington, DC (January 30, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed motions with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to disqualify President Barack Obama's recent purported recess appointees to the agency from participating in the Foundation's six cases pending before the Board.

Foundation attorneys argue that the appointments are unconstitutional and, therefore, the Board lacks the quorum necessary to hear Foundation cases. This legal challenge is part of an ongoing controversy over the constitutionality of Obama's recent move to install three members to the NLRB as "recess appointees" despite the fact that the U.S. Senate was not in recess.

Foundation attorneys also were among the first to challenge the constitutionality of Obama's "recess appointments" in federal court. An earlier motion challenging the appointments, filed by the Foundation and other plaintiffs challenging the NLRB’s notice posting rules, is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Read the entire release here.

Read one of the Foundation attorneys' motions to disqualify the "recess appointees" here.

Hotel Officials, Union Bosses Hit With Multiple Federal Labor Board Charges for Abusive Organizing Tactics

Union organizers verbally abuse Marriott employees and spy on workers in changing rooms after striking backroom deal with company officials

New York, NY (January 24, 2012) – A group of New York City Marriott (NYSE: MAR) employees – acting on behalf of their coworkers – have filed federal charges against the company and a local union for workplace intimidation and harassment.

The three SoHo Marriott employees filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys.

New York Hotel & Motel Trades Council Local 6 union organizers entered into a backroom deal with company officials that allows union organizers unfettered access to the employees in order to install a union in the workplace.

Abusing this privilege, union organizers are attempting to browbeat the workers into supporting the union through a prolonged campaign of intimidation and harassment. Meanwhile, company officials deny workers' attempts to meet on company grounds.

Union officials have used video cameras in employee changing rooms, accessed employee lockers and handled employees' personal possessions, and have even resorted to verbal abuse. Union officials even took photographs of a female employee without her consent while she was changing her uniform in an employee changing room.

Read the entire release here.

Worker Advocate Challenges Constitutionality of Obama's Controversial Labor Board Recess Appointments

Case over controversial NLRB posting becomes first legal challenge to Presidential attempt to make "recess appointments" without actual recess of the Senate

Washington, DC (January 13, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a motion in federal court challenging the legality of President Barack Obama's recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The legal challenge is part of a larger case attacking controversial new NLRB rules that require every employer to post incomplete information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they've never violated or been accused of breaking federal law. The NLRB's posting rules do not require union officials to issue information about workers' rights to refrain from union membership or opt out of union dues. Currently employers can only be required to post notices if the Board has ruled that a violation of labor law occurred.

The Foundation's case has been consolidated with other legal challenges to the biased NLRB notice posting rules brought by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW), and two small businesses. Those parties filed the joint motion today raising the issue of the NLRB's lack of authority to implement the rule given the unprecedented recess appointments.

The new filings in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia case comes after NLRB lawyers notified the court that President Obama's recent recess appointees were now parties in the ongoing legal battle. Under the U.S. Supreme Court's New Process Steel decision, the NLRB needs three members to act. However three of the five current NLRB members were installed by unilateral Presidential appointment earlier this year, despite the fact that the Senate was not in a self-declared recess.

In the motion papers, Foundation attorneys argue that the controversial appointees to the Board are not legitimate because the U.S. Senate is still in session per the body's rules, so there was no "recess" for the President to make appointments without Senate confirmation. Therefore the NLRB lacks the necessary quorum to implement the new posting rules. Foundation attorneys are asking the judge to rule on the constitutionality of the three recess appointees.

Read the entire release here.

Transcript Shows SC Boeing Employees Kept in Dark about Labor Board Sham Settlement

Washington, DC (December 14, 2011) – National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) documents show that workers who had intervened in the Board’s high-profile case against Boeing were instead shut out of the entire process by which the case ended with Boeing agreeing to locate production of its 737 MAX plane in forced-dues Washington State.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, North Charleston Boeing employees Dennis Murray, Cynthia Ramaker, and Meredith Going, Sr. moved to intervene in the NLRB's unprecedented case targeting the company for locating production of some of its 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, in part due to its popular Right to Work law. In Right to Work states, workers cannot be compelled to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment.

An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) originally denied the workers' request but was forced by the NLRB in Washington, D.C., to allow them to participate as partial intervenors in the case.

The transcript of the hearing ending the case in which NLRB, Boeing, and International Association of Machinist (IAM) union lawyers participated show that the workers were explicitly shut out of the proceedings. According to the transcript, the judge acknowledged that he had "finessed" the workers out of the process, which occurred without any notice to the workers.

Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, issued the following statement in the wake of the hearing's revelations:

"The Obama Labor Board has set a dangerous precedent that will allow union bosses to bully job providers not to locate jobs in states with Right to Work protections for their workers, thus forcing more workers into union-dues-paying ranks, or face costly legal action.

"Boeing, IAM, and NLRB lawyers' transparent ploy to sweep the South Carolina workers under the rug once again shows that the Obama NLRB puts union boss priorities above the rights and well-being of individual employees.

Read the entire release here.

Worker Files Brief Defending Rights in Teamster Union Discrimination Federal Appeal

Despite multiple rulings, Teamster union bosses try to validate discrimination against worker

Denver, CO (November 23, 2011) – An Interstate Bakeries employee from Ponca City, Oklahoma has filed a brief in federal court asking the court to uphold repeated decisions in his favor against Teamster union workplace discrimination.

With continued free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, Interstate Bakeries employee Kirk Rammage filed the brief Wednesday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Rammage was the single nonunion sales representative with Dolly Madison for over 15 years before his division was merged in 2005 with Wonder Bread/Hostess. Although the company initially wanted to retain Rammage and protect his seniority during the merger, Teamsters Local 523 union bosses demanded that union members receive preferential treatment, putting Rammage at the bottom of the seniority roster despite his workplace tenure. The company later caved into the union bosses' demand.

At Interstate Bakeries, seniority increases employees' chances of securing desirable sales routes. By insisting that Rammage lose his seniority, Teamster officials effectively signaled that union workers took priority over their nonunion colleagues. As a result, Rammage was forced to commute to a new work location more than 70 miles away.

Read the entire release here.

Worker Advocate Offers Legal Aid to Charlotte Employees Discriminated Against during Democrat Convention

Media reports suggest nonunion workers may be ordered off their jobs to satisfy demands of Organized Labor

Charlotte, NC (November 9, 2011) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which helps victims of forced unionism, is offering free legal aid to workers who refrain from union membership and may be ordered off their jobs or prevented to work during the 2012 Democratic National Convention scheduled for August 2012 in Charlotte.

In response to media reports, the Right to Work Foundation is offering free legal assistance for nonunion Time Warner Cable Arena, surrounding venue, local hotel, and other area workers who may lose work in favor of unionized workers in the lead up to and during the convention.

Discriminating against workers who exercise their right to refrain from union membership is a clear violation of North Carolina's Right to Work law and the federal National Labor Relations Act.

Read the entire release here.

Worker Advocate Denounces NLRB Rule Designed to Push Workers into Compulsory Unionism

National Right to Work Foundation President criticizes Labor Board’s decision to selectively publicize workers' rights

Washington, DC (August 25, 2011) – Today, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) implemented new rules governing the notification of employee rights in the workplace.

Until these changes, employers were required to post notices of workers' rights only if a violation of labor law occurred. However, the new rules require every employer to post incomplete information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they've never committed a violation or been accused of unfair labor practices. Meanwhile, union officials are not required to issue information about workers' rights to refrain from union membership or opt out of union dues.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation – a charitable organization that provides free legal assistance to employees nationwide – made the following statement regarding the new rules:

"The NLRB's new rules are just the latest example of the Obama Labor Board’s biased approach to administering labor law.

"Just as the Obama administration promises to lessen the job-destroying weight of federal regulations, Obama's NLRB comes out with a new 'posting rule' to saddle every business – from ‘mom and pop' stores to IBM – with new mandatory posting requirements designed solely to grease the skids for more forced unionism."

Read the entire release here.

Union Member Seeks to Block Obama Labor Department’s Efforts to Roll Back Union Disclosure Rules

Department guts disclosure rule that has exposed numerous corrupt union boss schemes, let rank-and-file members know how dues are spent

Washington, DC (May 23, 2011) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a Maryland county government employee is asking a federal court to stop the Obama Administration from allowing union bosses to conceal lavish and corrupt union expenditures from workers.

Chris Mosquera, a member of a Municipal County Government Employee Local of the United Food and Commercial Worker (UFCW) union, filed the lawsuit against Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for rescinding a union boss disclosure rule which would make it less difficult for workers to hold union officials accountable.

Unions covered by the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) with total annual receipts of $250,000 or more are currently required to submit annual financial statements to the U.S. Department of Labor. LM-2 forms are the public disclosure documents for these larger unions and are available online on the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) website.

These forms have helped workers and citizen activists expose many unscrupulous union boss schemes, including lavish benefits to high-ranking union officials and loyalists, superfluous spending on union boss transportation (including private jets), and shady political spending (such as the Service Employees International Union bosses’ links to the disgraced political organization ACORN).

Read the entire release here.

Army Wives Driver Wins over $55k in Lost Wages After Teamster Union Boss Blacklisting

Teamster union bosses’ ugly retaliation prevents employee from making a living

Washington, DC (March 17, 2011) – An ABC Studios movie/television driver has won over $55,000 in lost income after Teamster union officials refused to allow him to do his job for nearly a year.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys helped the driver win the case before a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) administrative law judge in Charleston, South Carolina.

Teamster Local 509 union officials currently enjoy exclusive bargaining privileges with ABC Studios in Charleston – and thus have a monopoly bargaining agreement with ABC that forces workers to go through Teamster Local 509’s hiring hall in order to obtain a job.

However, because Local 509 union members were working on other television and movie productions, Thomas Coghill – who was from Wilmington, North Carolina and a member of Teamster Local 391 – worked on the set of the Charleston-based Army Wives television series. Coghill worked during the show’s first two seasons beginning in 2008 as a makeup truck driver.

However, as more Local 509 union members became available to work on the production of Army Wives, a dispute over who should be eligible to work on the set of Army Wives erupted between various Teamster union officials and Coghill was removed from Local 509’s “Movie Referral List” because he was not a member of Local 509. Meanwhile, Local 509 union members continue to receive preferential treatment in job placement on the set of Army Wives.

Read the entire release here.

Last week, Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, pointed out in Investor's Business Daily that the real issue in the ongoing battles between Big Labor and reform-minded public officials in various states across the country is getting lost in the union bosses' self-serving rhetoric.

As Mix notes, given the media coverage of the battle in Wisconsin:

Americans learning about organized labor's battles in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana and other states from TV, radio and newspaper reports may understandably be confused about what is at stake, especially if they have no personal experience with unions themselves. From afar, it's easy to draw the conclusion that public employees' right to join a union is at stake.

Of course a worker's right to join a union is not the issue at all. The real issue at stake is that Big Labor enjoys numerous government-granted special privileges at the expense of workers' individual rights:

...What reform-minded elected officials are seeking to curtail, and in
some cases even abolish, is government union chiefs' legal power to
force public servants into a union as a condition of employment.

Under the current labor laws of nearly half of the states, government union officials have been explicitly authorized to force all public employees in a workplace to pay union dues or be fired, as long as a majority of their fellow employees (among those expressing an opinion) support unionization.

Such forced-unionism laws, which Big Labor is now fighting furiously to keep on the books in the face of increasingly intense public opposition, actually trample on, rather than protect, employees' freedom to make personal decisions about unionism.

And that's the point. So next time you hear union bosses like Richard Trumka shouting about "protecting workers' rights," it's important to keep in mind that what he really means is "protecting union bosses' special powers."