Foundation Forces Union Officials to Abandon Their Illegal Scheme to Coerce Engineers into Union Ranks

**Aberdeen, MD (August 8, 2007)** – Following challenges by employees unlawfully unionized by “card check,” International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers (IAM) union Local 2424 officials backed down and settled federal labor charges pending against them.

The settlement came after federal investigators found that union officials had violated the employees’ rights during a so-called card check organizing drive which bypassed the secret-ballot election process.

Last month, three employees working for private contractors at the Aberdeen Test Center military facility obtained free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation. Foundation attorneys filed charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 5 office in Baltimore. The NLRB charges detailed multiple union violations of the employees’ rights, including unionizing employees who did not support the union, unlawfully transferring these employees into a union bargaining unit, and threatening employees with termination if they did not join the union.

To avoid an embarrassing NLRB prosecution, IAM officials formally settled the charges by renouncing monopoly bargaining privileges over the more than 150 employees who were unlawfully unionized. The union brass also agreed that they would not attempt to unionize the engineers under a card check scheme, but instead would only use the less coercive NLRB-supervised secret-ballot election process.

“IAM union bosses got caught red-handed violating the rights of the very employees they claimed to represent,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “While this case highlights the coercion inherent in so-called ‘card check’ unionization, ultimately these abuses by union bosses will not end until their compulsory unionism privileges are eliminated.”

The case is one of many documented instances of fraud and abuse in card check organizing drives. Under card check, union-controlled authorization cards are used as “votes” for unionization. Employees report that cards are often collected under false-premises or through intimidation. In this case, the union declared a victory in their card check drive when it did not even have cards from a majority of employees.

The employees also filed charges against their employers (Jacobs Technology Inc., LogSec. Corporation and Science and Technology Corporation) for their role in imposing the unwanted union on the workers by recognizing IAM officials as the employees’ collective bargaining representative without proof that the union had the support of a majority of the employees.

Staunch Employee Opposition Forces Union out of Multiple Kaiser Permanente Facilities Across Southern California

**Los Angeles, CA (July 9, 2007)** – A group of four Kaiser Permanente employees have forced the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers (SEIU-UHW) union to abandon multiple Kaiser Permanente units across the Southern California area after use of coercive union organizing methods. The action comes in the wake of unfair labor practice charges the employees filed just weeks earlier on June 21, and it will impact up to 400 Kaiser Permanente employees throughout the area.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys helped Lisa Eklund and three of her co-workers file the federal charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the SEIU-UHW union and Kaiser. The charges alleged that union officials deceived Kaiser employees into signing union “authorization” cards that would later be counted as “votes” favoring unionization. Union officials also falsely told employees that signing the card was merely a request for more information about unionizing and promised higher pay raises and benefits. Lastly, SEIU-UHW officials engaged in unlawful bargaining over the employees’ wages and working conditions before the employees had even selected union officials as their representatives.

On December 28, 2006, Kaiser management recognized SEIU-UHW on the basis of the “card check” count. However, Eklund’s charge highlights that SEIU-UHW union officials manipulated the size of the bargaining unit and secured signatures from employees who were ineligible to participate in the “card check” organizing drive. Upon the heath care employees’ request to disclose the names of employees who were eligible to participate, union officials were unable to indicate which employees were inside or outside of the alleged bargaining unit.

Within two weeks of filing the federal charges, the NLRB indicated its intention to formally investigate the apparently unlawful “card check” organizing scheme. Upon the NLRB Region 21’s initial investigation, SEIU-UHW union officials and Kaiser rapidly abandoned the “card check” count.

“SEIU officials have been repeatedly caught red handed running roughshod over employee rights during these coercive organizing drives,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “These campaigns give employees two basic choices- union ‘yes,’ or union ‘yes.’”

“Card check” union organizing strips workers of the limited protections of a government-supervised secret ballot election in deciding whether or not to unionize. Instead, union agents frequently mislead or badger workers one-on-one into signing cards that are then counted as “votes” favoring unionization.

Only months earlier National Right to Work Foundation attorneys forced SEIU Local 49 to abandon the coercive “card check” union organizing process in Oregon and Washington for six months because of repeated and widespread abuses.

Statement on Congressman Andrews' Interference in Trump Plaza Hotel Union Election

**Atlantic City, NJ (March 30, 2007)** - Justin Hakes, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation issued the following statement regarding recent developments in the NLRB charge filed this morning against the UAW for illegal tampering with the scheduled NLRB election at the Trump Plaza Casino:

"The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has confirmed it is opening an investigation into whether the UAW union committed unfair labor practices in enlisting Congressman Andrews to interfere in tomorrow's NLRB election by holding the sham certification ceremony. This particular NLRB regional office takes the position that it will not block the election or the impound ballots unless the employer or union themselves ask it to do so.

"However, the unfair labor practice investigation called for by the National Right to Work Foundation will move forward. Assuming the agency agrees that the union's and Andrews' actions coerced the employees, Right to Work attorneys will seek a remedy that includes voiding any illicit union status as bargaining agent, as it has done successfully in other cases throughout the country.

"Additionally, if any Trump Plaza dealers seek free legal assistance from the Foundation, our staff attorneys also stand ready to file post-election objections to prevent the tainted election from resulting in improper certification of the union in the first place."

Union-Abused Employees Give Testimony to Congress Against Coercive “Card Check” Organizing Scheme

Washington, DC (February 8, 2007) – Two employees represented by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys in defending against abusive “card check” union organizing tactics today gave written testimony to the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee about their disturbing experiences.

The coercive card check unionization scheme is highly controversial for severely curtailing employees’ freedom to choose whether or not to unionize and for stripping workers of the limited protections of a government-supervised secret ballot election.

Mike Ivey, a Foundation-assisted materials handler at Freightliner Custom Chassis Corporation in Gaffney, South Carolina, detailed the unrelenting harassment he and his coworkers have faced over the past four years at the hands of United Auto Workers (UAW) union organizers seeking to force unwanted unionization upon them. This has occurred even though more than 70 percent of the employees submitted a petition stating they want nothing to do with the UAW.

“Faced with a never-ending onslaught, we employees feel that the UAW is holding our heads under water until we drown,” he stated. “Some employees have had five or more harassing visits from these union organizers. The only way, it seems, to stop the badgering and pressure is to sign the card….Moreover, in many instances, employees who signed cards under pressure or false pretenses later attempted to retrieve or void this card. The union would not allow this to happen, telling them that they could not do so.”

Karen Mayhew, a Portland, Oregon, employee of Kaiser Foundation Health Plan (a component of the national Kaiser Permanente health network) also detailed misrepresentations made to employees during a card check campaign last year involving the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Aside from collecting the cards under false pretenses – that they would actually be used to get a secret ballot election – union organizers browbeat people to sign. Ultimately, the federal labor board forced the union to rescind its unlawful “voluntary recognition.”

“Throughout this whole ordeal, my colleagues and I were subjected to badgering and immense peer pressure. Some of us even received calls at home,” Mayhew stated. “I believe this abuse was directed towards me at the request of the union in an effort to intimidate me and have me back down… union abuses of a wide variety are the rule in ‘card check’ campaigns, not the exception.”

Karen Mayhew’s testimony can be found at www.nrtw.org/pdfs/Mayhew.pdf. Mike Ivey’s testimony can be found at www.nrtw.org/pdfs/Ivey.pdf.

Princeton, WV (December 26, 2006) – Walter Coeburn, a ResCare, Inc. assisted living employee filed federal labor board charges against the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) District 1199 and ResCare for their attempts to force unwanted unionization on Coeburn, his co-workers and employees all across West Virginia. Coeburn filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 11 offices in Winston Salem, NC, with assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys. The unfair labor practice charges ask for an injunction to block the union and ResCare from continuing their unlawful activities, and they detail multiple violations of the National Labor Relations Act by SEIU officials and ResCare. As part of an agreement kept secret from employees, ResCare executives agreed to abandon even the limited protections offered to employees under a NLRB-supervised secret ballot election and instead impose a coercive “card check” procedure, in which union organizers can browbeat employees individually to sign cards that are then counted as “votes” for unionization. Because of the prevalence of union intimidation tactics directed at employees, card check is controversial for severely curtailing workers’ freedom of choice in deciding whether or not to unionize. Consequently, the organizing scheme has sparked numerous legal cases documenting coercive activities by union organizers, including threats, bribes, and stalkings of rank-and-file workers. In this case, witnesses said that SEIU organizers lied to many employees by stating that signing the cards was only a request “to get more information.” The “card check” procedure used at ResCare is part of a larger misnamed “neutrality and card check agreement” designed to have the employer assist union organizers in pushing workers into the union’s ranks. Under such agreements, the company commonly must give union officials unfettered access to workers on company property and the home addresses and phone numbers of employees, resulting in menacing home visits from groups of union organizers. Also, such agreements usually include a “gag rule” preventing the employer from commenting on any potential impact of unionization. In exchange for agreeing to assist the union with the card check scheme, ResCare executives received concessions from SEIU officials, including an agreed upon contract to be foisted upon the employees once the card check unionization was complete. Such “pre-recognition bargaining” clearly violates federal law, yet the SEIU and ResCare are now rolling this scheme out all over West Virginia and Ohio. “Union officials sold out the interests of the very workers they sought to ‘represent’ in order to force unionization and compulsory dues on these employees,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union organizers’ illegal behavior shows that they don’t respect the rights of the workers; they just want the forced union dues revenue.” In response to their ill treatment, Coeburn and his colleagues conducted a decertification drive to throw out the unwanted union. A majority of employees in the bargaining unit have signed a petition asking the NLRB to conduct an election to determine if the SEIU really has the majority employee support it claims.

Employees Hit Kaiser Permanente and OPEIU Union with Federal Charges for Illegally Forcing Union on Workers

**Silver Spring, MD (December 11, 2006)** – Three workers aided by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys have filed federal labor board charges against the Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) Local 2 and their employer Kaiser Mid-Atlantic (a component of the national Kaiser Permanente health network) after union organizers entered into a pact with the healthcare giant to impose unwanted unionization on healthcare professionals.

The charges, filed at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), detail an agreement between OPEIU and Kaiser Permanente in which union officials bargained contract provisions for workers they did not legally represent. Such “pre-recognition bargaining” violates the National Labor Relations Act.

In exchange for a premature contract, Kaiser Permanente executives agreed to abandon even the limited protections offered to employees under a NLRB-supervised secret ballot election and instead impose a coercive “card check” procedure, in which union organizers can browbeat employees individually to sign cards that are then counted as “votes” for unionization.

Because of the prevalence of union intimidation tactics directed at employees, card check is controversial for severely curtailing workers’ freedom of choice in deciding whether or not to unionize. Consequently, the organizing scheme has sparked numerous legal cases documenting illegal activities by union organizers, including threats, bribes, and stalking of rank-and-file workers. In this case, OPEIU union officials told employees that raises and benefit increases depended on their signing up for union representation.

The “card check” procedure is part of a larger misnamed “neutrality agreement” designed to assist union organizers in pushing workers into the union’s ranks. Employers agree to give union officials unfettered access to workers on company property, and the home addresses and phone numbers of employees resulting in menacing home visits from groups of union organizers. Also, such agreements usually include a gag rule preventing the employer from commenting on any potential impact of unionization.

Once union officials gain monopoly bargaining power, they can then force all employees to pay dues to the union just to keep their jobs. Union officials hold this power because Maryland is one of 28 states that has not yet passed a Right to Work law, which would mandate that union membership and dues payment are strictly voluntary.

“Union officials want to force unionization on these workers from the top down, like it or not,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union officials’ illegal behavior shows that they do not respect the rights of the workers they claim to represent; it’s all about the money and finding new sources of forced union dues revenues.”

Employees Considering Appeal of Cryptic Ruling Dismissing Federal Racketeering Suit Against Freightliner and UAW Union

**Charlotte, NC (November 10, 2006)** – Five employees of Daimler-Chrysler subsidiary Freightliner, LLC are considering an appeal of a federal judge’s cryptic and illogical dismissal yesterday of their federal racketeering lawsuit against the United Auto Workers (UAW) union and Freightliner. The employees filed the lawsuit in January with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation.

“To get the company’s help in coercing thousands of workers into union ranks and to obtain at least $1 million in annual dues revenues, UAW officials sold out the very workers they sought to represent,” said Foundation vice president Stefan Gleason. “The ruling uses circular reasoning, is incorrect as a matter of law, and is ripe for an appeal.”

Filed in the U.S District Court for the Western District of North Carolina under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Practice Act (RICO), the class-action lawsuit challenges an agreement intended to install a sweetheart “company union,” alleging a pattern of violations of longstanding federal law that bars employers from delivering “things of value” to unions in an effort to co-opt the union.

The autoworkers’ complaint outlines a secret quid pro quo arrangement between Freightliner and the UAW in which union officials agreed in advance to significant bargaining concessions at the expense of the Freightliner workers at its nonunion facilities in North Carolina in exchange for valuable company assistance in organizing those workers.

Specifically, Freightliner and the UAW union expressly agreed to limitations on wages, cancellation of employee profit sharing bonuses, an increase in health care costs shouldered by employees, and other concessions before union officials even had the right to bargain for employees. UAW officials outlined their lengthy list of concessions in a once-secret document titled “Preconditions to Card Check Procedure.” In a related case, the National Labor Relations Board’s general counsel found the preconditions to be illegal.

In return, Freightliner promised to provide valuable organizing assistance outlined in a document titled “Card Check Procedure,” including holding compulsory “captive audience” meetings during which union organizers could propagandize employees, granting wide access to employees at home and at work, and not making any negative comments about unionization. Freightliner also denied employees secret ballot elections to choose whether to unionize. The “Card Check Procedure” also required Freightliner to automatically recognize the union when presented with the requisite number of signed authorization cards. In such Top Down organizing drives, employees are frequently coerced, browbeaten, or misled into signing such cards, which are then counted as “votes” in favor of unionization. Workers have also complained that signed cards are difficult to revoke.

Yet, the district court dismissed the suit in a cryptic and illogical four-page order in which the secret quid pro quo agreement is somehow equated with card check agreements that occur without such sweetheart provisions. Additionally, the ruling illogically suggests that finding such a quid pro quo arrangement reached prior to the negotiation of an actual collective bargaining agreement to violate criminal prohibitions of federal labor law would be tantamount to “criminalizing all collective bargaining agreements.”

The suit lists four counts of RICO violations regarding the enforcement of these corrupt arrangements against the employees of certain Freightliner facilities. The employees seek financial restitution to all employees at the Mount Holly, Gastonia, and Cleveland, North Carolina facilities in the form of treble damages for all dues seized and earnings lost as a result of the unlawful pact. Additional Freightliner plants known to be covered by the secret agreement are located in High Point, North Carolina and Gaffney, South Carolina.

Visit the Foundations Freightliner Top Down Organizing page for more information.

Thomas Built Buses Employees Appeal Ruling in Suit Against Federal Labor Board for Denial of Constitutional Rights

**High Point, NC (October 17, 2006)** – Today, a group of Thomas Built Buses employees filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit challenging a District Court decision to dismiss their lawsuit against the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for denial of their constitutional due process rights after union representation was forced upon them.

The lawsuit, originally filed in April with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, alleges that the NLRB improperly refused to allow workers to challenge the results of a tainted union election that granted United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials monopoly bargaining power over roughly 1,200 employees at the Thomas Built facility.

The NLRB officials decreed that employees may not intervene to assert their rights and challenge union representation election results because they lack standing. The precedent-setting decision contradicts the notion that the National Labor Relations Act establishes rights for employees, rather than simply empowering union officials. Foundation attorneys point out that the ruling violates workers’ procedural due-process rights under the U.S. Constitution.

The NLRB’s procedural decision whitewashed the illegal eleventh hour intervention of Thomas Built to assist its hand-picked union in winning monopoly bargaining representation over the employees. In June 2005, one day before a union representation election, Thomas Built officials issued a surprise memo to all High Point workers, announcing that employees would have to pay higher health insurance premiums if they remained nonunion.

Working in tandem, UAW union operatives immediately circulated copies of the memo around the facility with “DID YOU SEE THIS" THE COST OF BEING NON-UNION JUST WENT UP!” written at the top. Employees opposing unionization report that this intervention by the company swung a large number of votes in favor of the union.

Under longstanding NLRB practice, such conduct requires that the election be set aside because it taints the employees’ vote. Union and company officials, however, wanted the same election result and did not file objections. When a group of employees tried to object to the tainted vote, NLRB officials refused to recognize them. The UAW union was then certified as the monopoly representative because, according to an NLRB regional director, “no timely objections have been filed.”

“Thomas Built employees must be allowed to challenge this unlawful last-minute intervention that clinched an election victory for the UAW union – or workers’ rights under the law will be sharply undercut,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “When the NLRB becomes a rubberstamp for union-employer collusion, it seriously undermines the credibility of a federal agency that is supposed to protect the rights of rank-and-file workers.”

Facing prosecution by the NLRB in early 2005, UAW union and Thomas Built officials agreed to cancel outright a company-wide sweetheart deal in which union officials had unlawfully bargained to limit workers’ wage demands and made other concessions in exchange for the company’s assistance in organizing the workers. After the union was forced out of the plant, however, UAW union officials petitioned for the election at issue in this case.

Worker Advocate Denounces 9th Circuit Ruling Upholding State Law Encouraging Coercive Union Organizing Methods

**Springfield, VA (September 21, 2006)** – Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, made the following statement in response to today’s ground-breaking ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. An en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit reversed two of its earlier appellate rulings by a vote of 8-3, upholding a state law that will effectively force coercive union organizing upon employees of private companies who receive state funds.

“In a controversial decision with national implications, the activist Ninth Circuit in Chamber v. Lockyer has done an about face and upheld a California law which will surely result in increased pressure on employees to join unions.

“This special-interest state statute is pre-empted by federal labor law, which is supposed to protect employees from pressure to unionize by other entities working in concert with union officials. Numerous federal courts across America have recognized this fact before the Ninth Circuit went out on this limb.

“The practical effect will be that employees of private employers wishing to accept funds from the state must be denied truthful information regarding the downsides of unionization, and their employers could ultimately be blackballed from government contracts unless they clear the path for union organizers to recruit new forced-dues-paying members. Moreover, union organizers will insist that the law entitles them to sweeping access to company facilities, employees’ private personal information, and the power to sidestep the less-abusive secret ballot election process for determining whether employees actually want a union – a procedure overseen by the National Labor Relations Board.

“State officials are using the heavy hand of government to trample upon workers’ rights. Because union hierarchies seem to be having difficulties persuading employees to join unions voluntarily, they have resorted to these tactics in order to maintain the flow of forced union dues into their coffers.

“The National Right to Work Foundation denounces this rogue appellate ruling and vows to support efforts to gain U.S. Supreme Court review.”

Hilton Employee Wins Settlement Forcing Union Officials to Halt Unlawful Misuse of Forced Dues

**Honolulu, HI (July 20, 2006)** – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Hilton Hawaiian Village employee faced down a top UNITE-HERE union official and defeated a union policy of coercing non-union workers to pay for activities unrelated to collective bargaining.

Grant Suzuki, an electrician at the hotel, filed federal charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in March 2005 after the UNITE-HERE Local 5 union hierarchy violated his rights by requiring him and other similarly situated nonmembers to pay into strike funds that are subject to use in strikes in industries such as health care and entertainment – including some located in Guam and Saipan. In response, the NLRB agreed to prosecute the union for violating workers’ rights and scheduled a formal hearing for Tuesday, July 18.

Defense of the union’s unlawful policy was apparently of particular interest to John Wilhelm, national head of UNITE-HERE’s hospitality division, who came all the way from New York to attend the hearing before an NLRB administrative law judge in Honolulu. In the end, however, UNITE-HERE’s lawyers inked a settlement agreement that forces the union to stop misusing Hilton Hawaiian Village employees’ forced dues, post notices in the hotel describing the workers’ legal rights, and create a separate fund from nonmembers to be used only on strikes in hotel bargaining units in Hawaii.

“This victory is an incremental yet important step toward limiting the power of union officials to shake down workers to support Big Labor’s agenda,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “But as long as Hawaii workers labor under a system of compulsory unionism, such abuses will inevitably continue.”

UNITE-HERE officials are currently in contract negotiations with Hilton Hotels Corporation and are using the strike fund to leverage the chain to agree to a so-called “neutrality agreement” covering other hotels across the country. A neutrality agreement is a contract under which an employer actively supports a union’s attempt to organize its own workforce. Employers often enter into such agreements to stop union officials’ pressure tactics such as publicity stunts, frivolous litigation, and boycotts. The National Right to Work Foundation is the vanguard opponent of neutrality agreements in the courts and at the NLRB, providing free legal aid to employees across the country who are victimized by these pacts that severely undermine worker free choice.

Because UNITE-HERE does not currently have a contract with Hilton, any hotel employee who resigns his or her formal membership now can end all unwanted union dues seizures from their paychecks.

Although the settlement was an incremental victory for employees’ rights, it does not offer broad enough relief to workers under UNITE-HERE’s coercive monopoly bargaining agreements. Suzuki, with free legal assistance from the Foundation, plans to appeal the union and NLRB-signed settlement to end the collection of all forced dues for strikes.