Federal Labor Board Finds Union Officials Guilty of Forcing Firing of Security Guard Who Didn’t Pay Dues

**El Paso, TX (June 18, 2007)** – After attorneys from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation helped Juan Vielma file federal charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), an administrative law judge ordered the local security guard’s reinstatement and back pay for his unlawful firing for exercising his right to cutoff payment of all union dues, a right protected by Texas’ Right to Work law.

But Foundation attorneys anticipate another attempt by union officials to stall the security guard from reclaiming his job by appealing the decision to the NLRB in Washington, DC. Vielma has yet to receive any back pay for wages he would have earned over the past year if he was still employed.

The Texas Attorney General has so far failed to prosecute these violations of the state’s Right to Work law, a criminal statute.

Vielma, an AKAL Security employee, prompted the NLRB to issue a complaint and prosecute the Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA) union and his employer after he was unlawfully suspended without pay in retaliation for asserting his legal right not to pay union dues. AKAL and SPFPA union officials falsely claimed Vielma worked on federal property that is not protected by Texas’ Right to Work law, and thus could be forced to pay union dues or be fired.

After a hearing before the NLRB, Administrative Law Judge Gregory Z. Meyerson ruled that the SPFPA union hierarchy must submit a written request to AKAL requiring Vielma’s reinstatement, as well as reimburse all his lost earnings and benefits since his termination. Additionally, union officials must cease and desist from enforcing contract clauses that make payment of union dues a requirement of employment –– and union officials must post notices at the El Paso facility and SPFPA union headquarters informing employees of their right to resign from union membership and cut off all dues payment.

“Because the Texas Attorney General’s office is so far AWOL, Vielma is stuck with the slow moving processes of the NLRB,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union officials are trying to destroy Mr. Vielma for standing up for his rights.”

The ruling described union lawyers’ last-ditch attempt to keep Vielma out of work as “a final effort in what appeared to be the inevitable” when they argued that the National Labor Relations “Act be ignored in any matters involving national security.” The ALJ referenced another Board decision to show that “this same Union argued that the NLRB has jurisdiction over airport screeners...whose work is obviously regulated by Homeland Security.”

Parallel to Vielma’s case, Foundation attorneys are helping Carlos Banuelos, a Corpus Christi security guard who filed federal charges against the SPFPA union. SPFPA union officials there are similarly attempting to enforce a forced dues contract clause in violation of Texas’ Right to Work law, which prohibits forced dues.

13 Former Giant Foods Employees Hit Union with Federal Charges for Unlawful Retaliatory Fines

**Landover, MD (May 10, 2007)** – A group of 13 ex-employees of Giant Foods, Inc. filed federal charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against two Carpenter union affiliates for failing to inform the employees of their rights and fining them $2,500 each after working for a nonunion employer. The employees worked under union monopoly contracts for over 20 years without union officials informing them of their rights.

Led by Clark Bowling, all 13 are former metal workers at Giant’s Landover warehouse where they performed various jobs for the Mid-Atlantic area grocery chain. Attorneys from the National Right to Work Foundation helped Bowling and his coworkers file the charges after officials from the Millwrights and Machinery Erectors Local 1548 and Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters (MARCC) unions told the employees they were required to be full union members. Union officials then levied retaliatory fines after the employees went to work for nonunion employers.

Union officials demanded that the workers join the Carpenter union affiliates despite failing to inform the employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership and to withhold all forced dues except those spent on union monopoly bargaining.

After the Giant warehouse closed in August 2005, Bowling and his coworkers were unemployed for weeks before securing new employment. Upon learning the workers had chosen a nonunion employer, union officials imposed internal union disciplinary fines against the employees despite the fact that they were not voluntary members of the union.

“It’s despicable for union officials to drive workers towards the poor house, especially after they failed to protect their jobs from being eliminated,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “In states like Maryland, with no Right to Work law that makes payment of union dues strictly voluntary, union officials seem to have a tremendous sense of entitlement to workers’ wages.”

In the Foundation-won *Communication Workers of America v. Beck* decision in 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that employees laboring under the National Labor Relations Act are entitled to resign from formal union membership and withhold forced dues for activities other than union monopoly bargaining such as union political activities and organizing. And only truly voluntary union members can be subjected to internal union discipline, such as fines.

Federal Labor Board to Prosecute Union for Illegal Firing of Catholic University Grounds Keeper

**Washington, DC (May 3, 2007)** – Following unfair labor practice charges filed by Catholic University employee Jerry Evans, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has agreed to prosecute the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) for forcing Evans’ firing.

Evans, a grounds keeper/landscape technician at Catholic, originally filed charges against the union and the university in January 2007 with help from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys. Now, after investigating those charges, the NLRB Region 5 Director in Baltimore has issued a complaint against the union for initiating the illegal firing and violating Evans’ due process rights.

In early November 2006, union officials demanded that Evans pay a $100 “initiation fee” and then pay $259 in dues. When Evans did not immediately pay, IUOE union officials sent a letter to Catholic University demanding that Evans be terminated, despite the fact that union officials failed to notify him of his right to refrain from formal union membership and failed to provide an adequate breakdown of how they would be spending Evans’ forced dues.

In 1988, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys argued and won *Communication Workers of America v. Beck*, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that employees are entitled to resign or refrain from formal union membership and cannot be forced to pay for costs unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities or organizing. The decision also requires union officials to provide employees with verified financial disclosure of union expenditures, so that employees can cut off the seizure of forced union dues used for such activities.

Despite the long-standing *Beck* ruling, union agents sent Catholic University a letter demanding that Evans be fired only a few days after they had demanded that he pay the unsubstantiated forced dues. Because of union officials’ illegal termination request, Evans has been out of work for nearly 5 months.

“Time and time again, union officials send workers to the poorhouse unless they fork over money to the union,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “It is sickening for union officials to threaten the livelihood of employees who refuse to toe the union line.”

In the wake of the NLRB charges, union officials backtracked and sent a letter to Catholic asking that Evans be rehired – presumably to limit the amount of back wages that union officials would be liable for due to the illegal firing. However, Evans is not yet back on the job, and the NLRB has set a hearing date for July 23 to prosecute the union.

Download the NLRB Complaint

Acura Employees Hit Union with Federal Charges for Threatening Firings for Refusal to Pay Fines

**Pleasanton, CA (May 2, 2007)** – Two employees of Acura of Pleasanton filed a new round of federal unfair labor practice charges today to protect themselves from repeated threats against their jobs and hundreds of dollars in unlawful retaliatory union fines.

Rachel Warner of Livermore and Marco Llamas of Modesto, both parts technicians at the auto dealership, filed the charges with help from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys against the International Union of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) Local 1546. Warner and Llamas filed the charges after union officials threatened them with the fines and termination simply for exercising their limited legal rights to refrain from formal union membership. The employees filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which will now investigate and decide whether to prosecute the union.

Warner and Llamas detail in their charge how union officials sent letters threatening them with termination and the fines despite the fact that they are not bound by internal union rules as nonmembers. (Both letters are viewable at: www.nrtw.org/pdfs/warner-llamas.pdf)

Warner and Llamas also allege that the union has violated its so-called “duty of fair representation” through the arbitrary and discriminatory nature of the fines.

“Union officials are trampling the very rights of the employees they claim to represent,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Such union abuse of employee rights is rampant in California because there is no Right to Work law which would prohibit forced unionism.”

Warner and Llamas filed similar unfair labor practice charges in early January, after union officials unlawfully rejected their letters resigning formal union membership, in violation of the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court *Communication Workers of America v. Beck* decision.

In the *Beck* decision, the High Court ruled that employees laboring under compulsory unionism contracts are entitled to resign from formal union membership and withhold forced dues for everything except the documented cost of monopoly bargaining. Such workers have the right to cut off the use of their forced dues by union officials for activities such as union political activities and organizing.

Download the threatening letters

Union Officials Forced to Drop $5,000 Retaliatory Fines Against Employees Doing Nonunion Work

**Atlanta, GA (April 5, 2007)** — Facing an embarrassing prosecution for their ugly retaliation against independent-minded workers, union officials quickly backtracked and settled federal unfair labor practice charges filed by four employees with free legal help from the National Right to Work Foundation.

The four local commercial insulation workers filed federal charges against International Association of Heat & Frost Insulators Local 48 (IAHFI) with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for refusing to honor their resignations from the union and threatening to fine them $5,000 each in retaliation for choosing to work for a nonunion employer. In fact, union officials filed state court lawsuits against the three non-English speaking employees (Gonzalo Gomez, Ubaldo Romero, and Juan Perez) to collect the unlawful fines.

Under federal law, workers who resign from union membership cannot be lawfully fined by a union – even if the union maintains a formal rule governing the situation, which it did not in this case. In Foundation-supported *Patternmakers v. NLRB* (1984) U.S. Supreme Court decision, the High Court ruled workers may resign their formal union membership immediately, at any time, and without restrictions.

When the four employees inquired about how to exercise their right to resign their union memberships at a recent union meeting, union officials told the workers that they could not resign unless they did so “correctly,” but failed to explain exactly what this meant. When asked later what this meant, union officials replied simply that the employees had failed to resign “correctly.”

Facing a probable prosecution because the fines had no basis even in internal union rules, union officials chose to settle the charges by rescinding the illegal fines and recognizing the workers’ union resignations. Additionally, union officials will be required to post notices at all Atlanta-area construction sites where the union is the monopoly bargaining agent to inform other employees of their rights. The union will also refund $250 plus interest to the fourth worker, Larry Blaisdell, who had been told to pay the money in order to appeal the illegal fine in the internal union kangaroo court.

“Union officials tried to bully workers who simply wanted to support their families by working for one of the many, good non-union employers in Georgia,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “It is a shame that legal action was necessary just to get union bosses to stop violating the rights of the very workers they claim to ‘represent.’”

Union officials’ actions also violated the spirit of Georgia’s highly popular Right to Work law – on the books since 1947 – which prohibits forcing workers to join or pay dues to a union as a job condition.

Security Guard Hits Union with Federal Charges for Threatening Jobs for Refraining from Union Membership

**Corpus Christi, TX (April 3, 2007)** – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a local Asset Protection and Security Services guard filed federal charges against the Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA) union and his employer today after union officials unlawfully threatened to have him fired for asserting his legal right to refrain from formal union membership and payment of union dues.

Carlos Banuelos’ charge, filed at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), details how the SPFPA union hierarchy holds an illegal monopoly bargaining agreement with his employer that makes financial support for the union a mandatory condition of employment.

Asset Protection and Security Services (ASSET), an international security provider of armed and unarmed security personnel, enforced its illegal requirement and ordered Banuelos to pay a fee to the union or face termination. However, Texas is one of 22 states that has passed a Right to Work law, ensuring that union membership and dues payment are strictly voluntary.

“Union officials are trampling Texas’ long standing freedom provided under the state’s Right to Work law that makes union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary, ” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The public needs the State’s Attorney General to step in here, because union officials are repeatedly thumbing their noses at Texas’ popular Right to Work law.”

This is the second charge filed within months in Texas where the Foundation has helped an employee fight back against unlawful dues demands from the SPFPA union hierarchy. Juan Vielma, a security guard for AKAL Security in El Paso, prompted the NLRB to issue a formal complaint against the same union for unlawfully suspending him without pay in retaliation for asserting his legal right to refrain from union membership. The NLRB held a related hearing last month, and Vielma and Foundation attorneys are currently awaiting a ruling.

SPFPA union officials are falsely claiming that Vielma, Banuelos, and their colleagues work on federal property that is not protected by the Right to Work law – and thus can be forced to pay union fees as a condition of employment. In the El Paso case, NLRB investigators determined that the union had no proof of these claims, just as they are expected to do in Corpus Christi. Accordingly, the NLRB Regional Director found that the union hierarchy violated federal law by restraining and coercing employees exercising their limited rights under the National Labor Relations Act to refrain from union participation.

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."

Machinist Union Hit with Multiple Federal Charges for Retaliating Against Employees Who Inquired about their Rights

**Cleveland, OH (March 26, 2007)** – Two employees of Alcoa Company (NYSE: AA) filed a new round of federal unfair labor practice charges today to protect themselves from a pattern of ugly union intimidation at the company.

The employees at Alcoa’s trucking wheel manufacturing plant filed the charges with help from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys after officials from the International Union of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) union repeatedly threatened them with unlawful discipline and termination simply for inquiring about their limited legal rights to refrain from formal union membership.

Today’s filing at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is the third related charge filed inside of one month. Alcoa employees Mark Bedenik and Matthew Slatten also detail in their charge how union officials kicked them out of the union in retaliation for inquiring about their rights to refrain from full union membership, but illegally continued to seize union dues from their paychecks.

After Bedenik and Slatten originally approached union representatives in February to inquire about their rights to refrain from formal union membership, union officials unlawfully misled them that full membership is a mandatory condition of employment and that resigning from the union would result in their termination. In retaliation for asserting their right to refrain from certain union activity, union officials effectively suspended six employees from eligibility for overtime work at the Alcoa facility for a period of up to one year. The employees responded with unfair labor practice charges filed at the NLRB.

“Union officials want workers to shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “These are just a few of many types of abuse faced by employees in states like Ohio with no Right to Work law to ensure that the payment of union dues is strictly voluntary.”

In a second related charge filed in early March, Foundation attorneys highlighted that union officials ordered Bedenik and Slatten to attend an IAM union internal kangaroo court held for the purpose of punishing them for inquiring about refraining from full union membership. Instructing the employees to attend the proceedings and only enter through the “rear entrance” of the building, union officials intended to fine and discipline the two for thinking about opposing the union. The employees chose not to show up for their “trial.”

Under the Foundation-won *Communication Workers of America v. Beck* decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that employees laboring under compulsory unionism contracts are entitled to resign from formal union membership and withhold forced dues for everything except the documented cost of monopoly bargaining. However, if union officials expel a union member for any reason other than a failure to pay dues, they are not entitled to collect *any dues whatsoever* from such persons.

Atlanta Construction Workers Hit Union with Federal Charges After Being Slapped with $5,000 Retaliatory Fines for Nonunion Work

**Atlanta, GA (February 21, 2007)** — With free legal help from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, three local commercial insulation workers filed federal charges against a local union for refusing to honor their resignations from the union and threatening to fine them $5,000 each in retaliation for working for a nonunion employer.

Gonzalo Gomez, Ubaldo Romero, and Juan Perez, filed the parallel unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the International Association of Heat & Frost Insulators Local 48 union. The workers seek an injunction blocking any illegal fine collection proceedings initiated by union officials in state court because Romero and Perez have already been served with notices demanding payment of the unlawful fines.

“Union officials are abusing their power over workers to prevent them from earning a good living,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “It is unconscionable for union bosses to attempt to drive workers into the poorhouse in vicious retaliation for pursuing work opportunities at nonunion job sites.”

Insulator union officials told workers at a recent union meeting that they could not resign their union memberships unless they did so “correctly,” but failed to explain exactly what this meant. When asked what this meant, union officials replied simply that the employees had failed to resign “correctly.”

Gomez and his coworkers cannot be lawfully fined because they resigned their union memberships (and thus were no longer subject to internal union rules) before returning to work – their right under the Foundation-supported *Patternmakers v. NLRB* 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision. In *Patternmakers*, the High Court ruled workers may resign their full, formal union membership immediately, at any time, and without restrictions.

The NLRB is responsible for investigating the charges and will decide whether to prosecute the union for unfair labor practices.

Aside from violating the National Labor Relations Act, Insulator union officials’ actions also run contrary to the spirit of Georgia’s highly popular Right to Work law – on the books since 1947 – which prohibits forcing workers to join or pay dues to a union as a job condition.

The workers’ charges follow unfair labor practice charges filed recently by coworker Larry Blaisdell, who was similarly retaliated against by Insulator union officials for resigning his union membership and working for a nonunion employer.

Federal Labor Board to Prosecute UAW Union for Bullying Nurses Seeking to Vote Out Unwanted Union

**Toledo, OH (February 6, 2007)** – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued a formal complaint and agreed to prosecute the United Auto Workers (UAW) union for a campaign of harassment and intimidation aimed at nurses seeking an election to vote the union out at St. Vincent Mercy Medical Center.

The complaint stems from unfair labor practice charges filed by St. Vincent nurse Amy Anderson in July 2006 with help from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys. Anderson’s charges detailed a bullying campaign by UAW union officials as she and others sought to collect signatures from their co-workers to throw the unwanted union out of their workplace.

The NLRB complaint against the UAW union and its Local 12 lists numerous examples of union agents physically intimidating nurses, including “following, surrounding, and impeding access to employees.” The complaint also cites that in one instance a union official physically “struck a clipboard containing the petition” from one of the nurse’s hands.

The NLRB complaint also alleges that UAW officials unlawfully intimidated nurses by such acts as recording their license plate numbers. The related harassment took place at and around the medical center, not only in the parking lots, but even in the cafeteria and bathrooms.

“UAW union officials have unleashed a shameless bullying campaign on St. Vincent nurses to keep the mandatory dues flowing in,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Given such hostility for the rights of the very rank-and-file nurses that UAW officials claim to ‘represent,’ it comes as no surprise that many nurses are leading the effort to show them the door.”

Despite union officials’ organized campaign of unlawful intimidation, the nurses were ultimately able to collect signatures from 30 percent of employees – the minimum necessary to trigger an NLRB supervised decertification election. Once the signatures are certified by NLRB Region 8 in Cleveland, the Board will hold a secret ballot election through which the health care professionals can rid their workplace of the abusive union.

Tired of union officials’ mistreatment, a group of nurses formed “Nurses For A Union-Free St. Vincent’s” (www.NursesKnowTheTruth.bravehost.com) with the goal of decertifying the unwanted automotive union. The NLRB has scheduled an April 24, 2007, hearing before an administrative law judge to prosecute the UAW union.

In April 2006, Foundation attorneys helped four nurses from St. Vincent’s file related federal charges with the NLRB against the UAW union and its Toledo Local 12 for violating their rights under the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision *Communications Workers v. Beck*. Under *Beck* and related rulings, union officials must inform workers of their right to refrain from formal union membership and from paying for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities.

Download the Complaint