Milwaukee, Wis. (December 6, 2005) — Agreeing with arguments made in an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief filed by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit yesterday struck down a Milwaukee County ordinance that required certain private employers contracting with the county to assist union officials in pressuring their employees into union ranks. Foundation attorneys filed their amicus curiae brief in April in support of MMAC’s appeal of a lower court ruling in Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC) v. Milwaukee County. In its opinion, the court found that the ordinance, County “Chapter 31,” is pre-empted by federal labor law intended to protect third-party employers from pressure to unionize by other entities in concert with union officials. Foundation attorneys had pointed out that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) clearly outlaws such requirements in contracts by private businesses, and that government entities should be held to the same standard. Under the unconstitutional ordinance, non-union private employers wishing to receive contracts from the County to provide services for the elderly or disabled were forced to sign a so-called “labor peace” or “neutrality agreement” requiring the employers to assist union organizers by granting them sweeping access to their facilities, providing them with employees’ private personal information, and not telling workers the full story with regard to unionization. The court found that the arguments made by Milwaukee County attorneys – that forcing employers to hand over employees to union organizers would somehow reduce work-stoppages – were unpersuasive. The Court instead saw the law as an unconstitutional attempt to preempt the NLRA. The court even pointed out that “Chapter 31” could actually increase the number of strikes. This finding of federal preemption comes as no surprise given that one of the law’s sponsors branded the law a “...fight to change the NLRA.” “Since workers are increasingly voting down unionization, union officials are attempting to use the heavy hand of government to corral workers into union ranks,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “We are pleased that the U.S. Court of Appeals has put a stop to Milwaukee County’s actions, which are part of a growing national trend.” The Milwaukee County’s Board of Supervisors passed “Chapter 31” in September 2000 over the objections of its own Corporate Counsel, who viewed the law as an impermissible regulation of private labor relations and contrary to the NLRA. If the Board had listened to its counsel rather than union lobbyists, taxpayer dollars would not have been wasted defending an ordinance that clearly violates federal labor law.

Portland, OR (November 7, 2005) – A local health care worker filed federal unfair labor practice charges after union officials gained monopoly bargaining power over Kaiser Permanente employees by deceiving them into signing union “authorization” cards. In granting Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 49 officials monopoly bargaining authority, Kaiser violated its own contract with the union which requires “private elections” for the union to be recognized, and only after such elections are requested by more than half of the employees. Karen Mayhew, who works in the Patient Business Services Department at a local Kaiser office, obtained free legal assistance from attorneys with the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation in filing the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for herself and roughly 65 similarly situated employees. Mayhew also filed a petition for decertification of the unwanted union within days of Kaiser’s granting SEIU officials monopoly bargaining power over the 65 workers affected. However, under the so-called “voluntary recognition bar rule,” created by the NLRB, workers cannot petition for an election for up to a year after a union gains recognition. Foundation attorneys have requested that the petition for election not be dismissed because a separate Foundation-assisted case challenging that rule’s validity is pending before the full NLRB in Washington, DC. “All too often, union bosses use misrepresentations and coercion during union organizing drives, and we are hopeful that the federal labor board will take swift action,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union officials’ illegal behavior shows that they do not respect the workers they seek to represent. They simply thirst for additional sources of forced union dues revenues.” Kaiser granted recognition to SEIU union officials based on the results of this “card check” scheme, even though the agreement between the company and union specifically states that recognition will only be granted after workers have a secret-ballot election to determine majority support of the union. Furthermore, several workers will submit statements that Kaiser held a meeting with its employees during which union officials explicitly told workers that signing the “cards” was not a vote for unionization, but instead was a request to hold a secret-ballot election and receive more information. The NLRB Region will investigate the charges and determine whether to issue a formal complaint. It will also make a decision on the disposition of the decertification petition in the coming weeks.

Gaffney, S.C. (August 12, 2005) – Facing embarrassing prosecution by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for unlawfully blocking an employee wage increase to coerce Gaffney-based Freightliner/Daimler-Chrysler workers to support unionization, the United Auto Workers (UAW) union and Freightliner today agreed to end the unlawful practices. UAW and Freightliner officials inked the settlement agreement with the NLRB after the NLRB’s General Counsel issued a formal complaint in response to unfair labor practice charges brought by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys for Freightliner employees. The NLRB issued a consolidated complaint earlier this week against both the union and Freightliner which was followed by the issuance of subpoenas that might have uncovered additional evidence of illegal union and company collaboration. The settlement requires company and union officials to post conspicuous notices throughout the Gaffney facility that union officials will not accept unlawful assistance from Freightliner in future unionization attempts, and that no future wage increases will unlawfully be withheld at the behest of union officials. “UAW officials raced to cover their tracks once they realized that the government was serious about holding them to account for coercing employees,” stated Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union and company officials have worked hand in glove to try to turn Freightliner workers into union dues payers.” Freightliner employees David Roach and Mike Ivey originally asked their Foundation attorneys to file charges in 2003 after UAW officials vetoed the long-scheduled and promised pay increase, and effectively required a freeze on pay raises at the Gaffney plant, apparently until such time as the employees agreed to unionization. The UAW union and Freightliner had a so-called “card check” or “neutrality” agreement that required the company to actively assist the UAW in its efforts to obtain signatures from employees on union authorization cards. In their charge found to be meritorious by the NLRB General Counsel, employees alleged that they “have been and are being threatened that they will get no raises unless and until they agree to unionization by the ‘company union’ known as the UAW,” even though the union enjoys little support from rank-and-file workers. In fact, approximately 70 percent of the plant’s employees had even signed and submitted a petition stating that they reject union affiliation and prefer to negotiate directly with company officials over wages and benefits. The NLRB complaint alleged that the company and union engaged in unlawful and coercive conduct that interfered with employees’ rights to refrain from concerted union activity. NLRB prosecutors alleged that not only was the withholding of a pay increase unlawful, but also that the granting of the pay increase at a later time after telling the employees that it had been authorized by the union was similarly unlawful.

Gaffney, S.C. (August 10, 2005) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel has decided to prosecute the United Auto Workers (UAW) union for unlawfully blocking a wage increase, thereby coercing Gaffney-based Freightliner/Daimler-Chrysler workers to support the union during a unionization campaign. Issuing a formal complaint in response to unfair labor practice charges brought by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys for Freightliner employees, NLRB’s Region 11 Office in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, will seek an order against both Freightliner and the UAW for unfair labor practices at an August 22 trial. The NLRB issued a consolidated complaint against both the union and Freightliner after the union’s officials failed to sign a settlement agreement that had been proposed by the NLRB. Freightliner employees David Roach and Mike Ivey originally asked their Foundation attorneys to file charges in 2003 after UAW officials vetoed the long-scheduled and promised pay increase, and effectively required a freeze on pay raises at the Gaffney plant, apparently until such time as the employees agreed to unionization. The UAW union and Freightliner had a so-called “card check” or “neutrality” agreement that required the company to actively assist the UAW in its efforts to obtain signatures from employees on union authorization cards. In their charge found to be meritorious by the NLRB General Counsel, employees allege that they “have been and are being threatened that they will get no raises unless and until they agree to unionization by the ‘company union’ known as the UAW,” even though the union enjoys little support from rank-and-file workers. In fact, approximately 70 percent of the plant’s employees had even signed and submitted a petition stating that they reject union affiliation and prefer to negotiate directly with company officials over wages and benefits. The petition stated in part that the undersigned employees “recognize the destructive and self-serving behavior of the UAW, and its documented role in union violence, union corruption, and plant closures caused by featherbedding and other uneconomic union work rules.” The NLRB’s complaint alleges that the company and union engaged in unlawful and coercive conduct that interfered with employees’ rights to refrain from concerted union activity. NLRB prosecutors allege that not only was the withholding of a pay increase unlawful, but also that the granting of the pay increase at a later time after telling the employees that it had been authorized by the union was similarly unlawful. “This is just the latest example of UAW and Freightliner officials working hand-in-glove to corral workers into union ranks whether they like it or not,” stated Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Freightliner and UAW officials have a cozy relationship that has resulted in the trampling of employee rights, not only in Gaffney, but also in High Point, North Carolina.” In neighboring North Carolina, the UAW union’s organizing techniques continue to grab headlines through a high profile controversy at the Freightliner-owned Thomas Built Buses facility in High Point. A group of workers at that facility recently filed a motion with the NLRB in Washington, DC, to allow them to challenge alleged election misconduct by Freightliner that occurred at the last minute.

Chicago, Ill. (July 26, 2005) – As top union officials pulled their unions out of the AFL-CIO, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation today announced that it will raise and earmark upwards of $2,000,000 this year to provide free legal assistance to workers seeking to free themselves from unwanted union membership and financial support. “It’s shameful that while union brass exercise a right to disaffiliate from the AFL-CIO, millions of workers across America are being barred from – or even fired for – leaving their unions,” said National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. The decision by the Foundation’s leadership comes as news emerged from the annual AFL-CIO conference in Chicago that Service Employees International Union (SEIU) chief Andrew Stern and Teamsters boss James Hoffa are pulling their unions out of the AFL-CIO in protest, complaining of its spending priorities and effectiveness. At the same time, however, most unionized employees in America do not enjoy a similar right to withdraw their financial support from unions in protest of their objectionable activities. In light of the hypocrisy shown by top union officials, the Foundation announced it will focus its efforts over the next several months in helping workers gain the same rights that these union officials are now openly exercising. Starting with $500,000 over the next 45 days, the Foundation will attempt to assist any worker who wishes to exercise their rights to resign from union membership and pay a reduced fee. The Foundation aims to raise an additional $1.5 million before the end of the year and use it to provide pro bono legal advice and representation. Union officials enjoy extraordinary coercive privileges under federal law and the laws of many states to force employees to join a union or pay dues as a condition of employment. In jurisdictions without Right to Work laws (which prohibit compulsory union dues), employees may formally resign from union membership but can nevertheless be compelled to pay union dues or fees or be fired from their jobs. However, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys have established through a series of victories at the U.S. Supreme Court that employees may only be compelled to pay a union’s proven collective bargaining costs, and not for activities such as lobbying or politics. But union officials routinely block workers from exercising these rights. “Stern and Hoffa are no longer part of an organization they disagree with,” said Gleason. “The Foundation plans to act aggressively until every American worker can say the same.”

High Point, North Carolina (July 20, 2005) – A group of Thomas Built Buses (TBB) employees filed a motion late yesterday with the full National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, DC, to allow them to bring some extraordinary last-ditch election misconduct to the attention of the agency. The appeal of the NLRB Regional Director’s refusal even to consider employee objections raises a core legal question that could determine to what extent employees – not just unions and employers – have an independent ability to assert their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Two days before the June 29 election, Scott Evitt, Human Resources General Manager for Freightliner issued an explosive memo announcing that TBB hourly-paid employees would have to pay higher health insurance premiums starting September 1, 2005. UAW union operatives quickly circulated copies of the Evitt memo around the facility with “DID YOU SEE THIS" THE COST OF BEING NON-UNION JUST WENT UP!” written at the top. The TBB employees allege that the last-minute intervention of their employer in announcing a major increase in benefit costs, tainted the election that granted United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials monopoly bargaining power over about 1,200 TBB employees. The workers objected to the extraordinary 11th hour move by the company, but the Regional Director refused to grant the employees’ motion to intervene, and therefore never even considered whether the misconduct tainted the election. Employees opposing unionization report that this last ditch intervention by the company swung a large number of votes in favor of the union – ultimately resulting in a vote of 714 to 508. Under long-standing law, an intervention of this nature intended to influence the election is illegal, and the proper legal remedy is to set aside the election as tainted. Not surprisingly, neither the company nor the union objected to the election result, so the employees asked National Right to Work Foundation attorneys to assist them in intervening. “We hope the Board recognizes that employees indeed have rights – regardless of whether company and union officials have cut a deal to undercut their freedom of choice,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “How can workers be denied the ability to challenge a tainted election when company and union officials seem to have acted hand in glove since the outset to turn the employees into dues-paying union members?” Facing a formal complaint and prosecution by the NLRB, UAW and TBB/Freightliner officials agreed earlier this year to cancel a company-wide sweetheart deal in which union officials had unlawfully bargained to limit workers’ wage demands and made other concessions in exchange for Freightliner’s assistance in coercing workers to unionize. Based on evidence provided by Foundation attorneys, the NLRB’s General Counsel also found that TBB/Freightliner officials provided unlawful assistance to the union and held unlawful “captive audience” speeches jointly with union officials to coerce employees to sign union authorization cards treated as “votes” for unionization.

Goshen, Ind. (July 7, 2005) – Approximately 200 employees at Cequent Towing Product’s Goshen facility have filed a “deauthorization” petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) asking the agency to hold an election to rid their work place of mandatory union dues. The employees filed the petition with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys after the agency has failed for 15 months to address an earlier petition for an election to throw out the union as the Cequent workers’ monopoly representative altogether. While the majority of Cequent workers who signed the earlier “decertification” petition were awaiting an NLRB election to throw out the union that had been imposed upon them without even the basic protections of a secret ballot election, Cequent entered into a forced unionism contract with the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) union, authorizing the firing of any Cequent worker who refuses to pay forced union dues. Under the National Labor Relations Act, employees have the right to call for a deauthorization election at any time. If 30% or more of the employees in the bargaining unit sign a deauthorization petition, the NLRB will conduct a secret ballot election to determine if a majority of the employees wish to cancel the forced union dues clause and restore employees’ freedom to decide whether to join or pay dues to the union. “Cequent and USWA officials have negotiated away the freedom of the company’s employees,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Meanwhile, the NLRB has stood idly by while USWA officials cemented themselves in place and helped themselves to forced dues from workers’ paychecks.” In March 2004, more than 230 workers signed the “decertification” petition, which was given to Cequent before it recognized the USWA union as their “exclusive bargaining representative.” If a decertification election is allowed and is successful, all Ceuqent employees then would be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment. In June 2004, the NLRB in Washington, DC, voted 3-2 to take up the Cequent case and consider whether union-opposition petitions signed by a majority of employees may be completely ignored during a so-called “card check” organizing drive. Workers at the facility found themselves unionized by the USWA union despite the fact that a majority of employees had submitted a petition expressing their desire to remain union free in advance of the union’s recognition by their employer as their “exclusive bargaining representative.” Cequent officials had implemented a “neutrality agreement” with the USWA union that severely limited employee freedoms. The NLRB’s ultimate decision will impact the enforceability of controversial “neutrality agreements,” contracts between unions and employers under which the employer agrees to actively assist organizers in unionizing its workers.

High Point, North Carolina (July 6, 2005) – A group of Thomas Built Buses employees today filed a motion with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to overturn the results of a tainted union election that granted United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials monopoly bargaining power over roughly 1,200 Thomas Built employees. In an extraordinary and illegal 11th hour intervention, Scott Evitt, Human Resources General Manager for Freightliner, issued a memo to all Thomas Built Buses employees in High Point on June 27, a day before the representation election, announcing that employees would have to pay higher health insurance premiums starting September 1, 2005. Evitt originally signed the illegal “neutrality agreement” between Freightliner and the UAW union and was embarrassed when federal officials filed a complaint and forced cancellation of the agreement. Mr. Evitt obviously had a strong interest in seeing that the union prevailed in the election. Working in tandem, UAW union operatives circulated copies of the Evitt 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 last ditch intervention by the company swung a large number of votes in favor of the union. Such interventions are illegal, and the proper legal remedy is to set aside the election as tainted. The employees asked the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal assistance, and Foundation attorneys moved to intervene on their behalf. “Mr. Evitt had egg on his face after the sweetheart deal he cut with the union brass to deliver employees into unionization blew up,” stated Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Fearing the exercise of the free will of employees, Mr. Evitt sought to sway employee sentiment in favor of unionization in an unlawful last-minute scare tactic.” Facing prosecution by the NLRB, the UAW union and Freightliner officials agreed earlier this year 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 Freightliner’s assistance in coercing workers to unionize. Based on evidence provided by Foundation attorneys, the NLRB’s General Counsel found that Freightliner officials at Thomas Built provided unlawful assistance to the union and held unlawful “captive audience” speeches jointly with union officials to coerce employees to sign union authorization cards that were treated as “votes” in favor of unionization. Bowing to pressure brought by UAW union operatives, Freightliner-DaimlerChrysler signed a so-called “neutrality agreement” that prohibited the traditional and less-abusive secret ballot election process. The company instead agreed to recognize the union on the basis of a majority of employees signing union authorization cards. Under the agreement, union organizers were given access to company facilities to browbeat workers into signing the cards.

Fresno, Calif. (June 27, 2005) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against a local Fresno casino for stifling the free speech of workers opposing unionization. James Terrazas’ charges, filed in recent days for similarly situated employees, come in the midst of an employee-initiated decertification campaign to strip the Unite-Here union of its monopoly bargaining privileges at Chukchansi Gold Resort and Casino (Chukchansi Gold). The charges point out that the employer established several work rules in violation of federal labor law. Additionally, casino management enforced some of these rules discriminatorily—targeting only those employees favoring decertification of the union. “Chukchansi Gold is doing the bidding of the Unite-Here union hierarchy by stifling employee dissent,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Employees should be allowed to exercise their freedom of speech—whether or not the union brass like what they hear.” Chukchansi Gold originally recognized the Unite-Here union as the monopoly bargaining agent of 700-800 employees in November of 2004, as the result of a controversial “card-check” system in which union organizers bypass the less-abusive secret ballot election process and instead browbeat and mislead workers into signing cards that are counted as “votes” for unionization. This coercive “card-check” campaign arose from legally suspect gaming compacts Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law last August. The compacts included a requirement forcing the affected casinos to enter into so-called “neutrality agreements” with local union officials. Under these coercive “neutrality agreements” union organizers are given full access to company facilities and employees’ personal information (including home addresses) as they seek signatures on union authorization cards. In a related action, Foundation attorneys have asked the Department of Interior not to approve the California gaming compacts because they unlawfully deny employers their right to ensure that employees get a secret ballot election when choosing whether to unionize. The Regional Director of the NLRB will now investigate Terrazas’ charges, and determine whether to issue a formal complaint.

Milwaukee, Wis. (April 26, 2005) — In a legal controversy of national intrigue, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed arguments in opposition to a Milwaukee County ordinance that requires certain private employers that contract with the county to assist union officials in pressuring employees into union ranks. Foundation attorneys filed the amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC) v. Milwaukee County, in support of MMAC’s appeal of a lower court ruling. In their brief, Foundation attorneys argue that the ordinance, County “Chapter 31,” is pre-empted by federal labor law intended to protect third-party employers from pressure to unionize by other entities in concert with union officials. Foundation attorneys point out that such requirements in contracts by private businesses are clearly outlawed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and that government entities should be held to the same standard. Under the ordinance, non-union private employers wishing to receive contracts from the County must sign a so-called “neutrality agreement” requiring them to assist union organizers by granting them sweeping access to their facilities, providing them with employees’ private personal information, and not telling workers the full story with regard to unionization. “Local officials are forbidden from using the heavy hand of government to trample upon employers’ and workers’ freedoms which are supposedly protected by federal law,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Since union officials seem to be having increasing 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.” On September 28, 2000, the County of Milwaukee’s Board of Supervisors passed “Chapter 31” over the objections of its own Corporate Counsel, who views the law as an impermissible regulation of private labor relations. One of the law’s sponsors branded the law a “...fight to change the NLRA.”