Sacramento, CA (March 2, 2005) – National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed urgent formal comments with the California Public Employees Relations Board (PERB), calling on them to reject union lawyer’s arguments that would gut current regulations intended to protect employee rights against compulsory union dues. The process originated when California Teachers Association (CTA) union officials, with the endorsement of numerous other powerful unions, suddenly proposed that the PERB eliminate most regulations that clearly define employees’ few remaining rights against compulsory union abuse. The regulations were enacted by PERB in the 1980s to uphold the rights of teachers recognized by the Supreme Court in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, a case won by Foundation attorneys. CTA union officials in their “revisions” proposed to completely gut sections that require union officials to inform teachers of their Hudson due process rights to financial disclosure and to give notice of the right to object to union dues spent for non-collective bargaining activities, such as politics. “Union officials want to eliminate access to the few constitutional protections teachers have in California against compulsory unionism abuse,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Rather than looking after the rights of the teachers they supposedly represent, union officials are simply trying to push through self-serving regulations.” In their formal comments, Foundation attorneys point out that gutting the PERB regulations would “leave employees in the dark” about how to challenge union officials’ claims. One of the changes would force employees to first use their union’s stacked internal procedures to challenge the amount of the fees, a process that is heavily slanted to favor the union officials’ demand for higher dues. The changes would also eliminate compliance procedures which make violating agency fee regulations an unfair labor practice, and delete provisions that mandate chargeable fees be calculated by an independent audit of union expenditures. Under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as articulated in the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision in Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, union officials must provide audited disclosure of their books and justify expenditures made from forced union dues seized from teachers who have chosen to refrain from union membership. PERB officials have scheduled a hearing about the proposed regulations for March 3, 2005 in Sacramento.

Phoenix, AZ (February 28, 2005) — National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed arguments in the Arizona Court of Appeals opposing a union attack on Arizona’s Right to Work law. The case originated in 2001 during contract negotiations between the City and officials of the AFL-CIO, Local 2384. Union officials wanted to force city employees to pay forced union fees equivalent to nearly 80% of full union dues. When City officials refused to negotiate these “fees” on the grounds that they violated Arizona’s Constitution and Right to Work statutes, the union filed a complaint with the Phoenix Employee Relations Board (PERB). The case is now with the Arizona Court of Appeals. Foundation attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief on Friday, supporting the City’s position that any form of forced dues violates state law. The Grand Canyon state’s highly popular Right to Work law protects all public employees and virtually all private-sector employees from being forced to join or support a union as a condition of employment. The amicus brief points out that any forced dues, even if the amount is less than full membership dues, is a violation state law and the state constitution because it forces employees to support an unwanted union. “Officials at the AFL-CIO are simply trying to sneak their way around state laws and the state constitution,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “They are looking for a ‘back door’ that will allow them to get a free ride on the backs of employees, instead going out and earning the voluntary support of rank-and-file workers.” Arizona’s Right to Work law was enacted over 50 years ago and is so firmly a part of Arizona’s culture that it is part of the state’s constitution. In the unlikely event that union officials were to be victorious, it would effectively void not just the Right to Work law, but a constitutional provision as well.

Fairfield, Calif. (February 22, 2005) - A local employee of Anheuser Busch has filed a fourth round of federal charges against a recalcitrant Teamsters union Local for again violating the terms of a settlement agreement by failing to provide an audited statement detailing how workers’ forced union dues are spent. Catherine Anderson, a part-time employee at Anheuser Busch’s Fairfield facility, filed the unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys. Teamsters union local 896 officials have repeatedly committed unfair labor practices and have reneged on settlement agreements. Union officials recently provided workers with a financial “statement” consisting of pages 10-13 of a larger report on the union’s expenditures. These fragments are a “schedule” of expenses claiming an unsubstantiated 96.06% of union dues money was spent on “collective bargaining” costs. This “schedule” does not provide any financial disclosure to justify the affiliation fees with the Teamsters International union and two Teamsters International union councils. Teamsters officials also continue to claim that 100% of union staff salary and overhead costs are chargeable to nonmembers, even though the disclosure shows resources were spent on non-chargeable activities. Anderson’s complaint challenges both claims. As a result of earlier federal charges filed by Anderson and a co-worker in July 2003, September 2004, and October 2004, Teamsters union local 896 officials settled the cases with a requirement that they properly inform workers of their right to refrain from financially supporting the union’s political and ideological causes. Teamsters officials had also agreed to cease illegal threats to have workers fired for refusal to pay excessive initiation fees and agreed to provide workers refraining from formal union membership “a precise and accurate statement” about the calculation of the forced union dues they could be legally compelled to pay. “This Teamsters union hierarchy wants workers simply to shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The repeated attempts by union officials to run roughshod over workers’ rights show the inevitable greed and corruption that flow from forced unionism.” The actions of Teamsters union officials violated worker protections recognized in the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Communications Workers v. Beck, a case argued and won by Foundation attorneys. Under the Beck ruling, workers may not be compelled to pay dues beyond the union’s proven collective bargaining costs, and they are entitled to an independent audit of union expenditures before any forced dues or fees are seized. Union officials also violated Penrod v. NLRB, which requires local union officials to provide financial disclosure for affiliated unions.

San Diego, Calif. (January 26, 2005) - The California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) has ordered San Diego government union officials to “cease and desist” discriminating against non-union employees by withholding benefits. The dental and eye-care benefits scheme, part of a “Memorandum of Understanding” between the San Diego Municipal Employees Association (MEA) union and the City, was designed to pressure employees into signing up as formal union members, thereby causing them to give up certain rights, including the ability to refrain from funding union political activities. The case originated in March 2002, when police criminalist Tanya DuLaney, with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, filed a formal charge with the PERB challenging the legality of the discriminatory policy. Union officials told DuLaney that she was ineligible to receive the city-funded benefits unless she joined the union. Not wanting to waive her constitutional rights in order to enroll in a benefits plan paid for by the city, DuLaney filed the unfair labor practice charges. “Rather than look after employees’ interests, MEA union officials withheld workers’ benefits to force them into union ranks,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Without this type of coercion, union officials know that many employees have little use for the union and would therefore resign and withhold financial support.” The PERB agreed with Foundation attorneys’ arguments and ruled that denying the benefit opportunity was an “adverse action” discriminating against non-union employees. The Board additionally recognized that DuLaney was engaging in a “protected activity” of exercising her right not to join a union, and that union officials violated their own duty to represent fairly the interests of all employees.