Federal Labor Board to Prosecute Union for Retaliation Against Security Guard for Asserting Legal Rights

**El Paso, TX (February 5, 2007)** – National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) officials have issued a formal complaint and agreed to prosecute a local security guard union and employer for unlawfully suspending a local guard without pay in retaliation for asserting his legal right to refrain from union membership.

The complaint stems from charges Juan Vielma, a local AKAL Security employee, filed against the Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA) union and his employer with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.

Vielma’s charge details how the SPFPA union hierarchy holds a monopoly bargaining agreement with his employer that illegally makes financial support for the union a mandatory condition of employment.

AKAL Security, a national contract security provider, capitulated to the union hierarchy’s illegal demands when they indefinitely suspended Vielma without pay in June 2006 for failure to formally join union ranks and pay money to the union. Under protections afforded by Texas’ highly-popular Right to Work law, union membership and dues payment are strictly voluntary. While Texas state prosecutors are yet to take action to enforce these clear violations of Texas criminal law, Foundation attorneys persuaded federal officials to pursue the matter to the extent possible under federal law.

AKAL Security and SPFPA union officials are falsely claiming that Vielma and his 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. NLRB investigators disagreed, and 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.

“Such blatant violations of the freedom of association are unbecoming of the State of Texas’ long tradition of defending employees’ Right to Work,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The union hierarchy wants Mr. Vielma and his coworkers to just shut up and pay up.”

Foundation attorneys seek reinstatement and back pay for Vielma, as well as a notice to all AKAL Security employees about their rights to refrain from union membership and dues payment. The NLRB has scheduled a hearing for March 13, 2007, before an administrative law judge.

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.

Teamsters Union Slammed with Federal Charges for Threatening to Have Workers Fired for Resisting Formal Union Membership

**Tacoma, WA (November 6, 2006)** – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a local group of mail equipment inspectors filed federal charges against the Teamsters Local 117 union today after union officials unlawfully misinformed them about their rights to refrain from formal union membership – and then threatened to have them fired for exercising those rights.

The workers’ charge, filed at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), details how Teamsters officials illegally informed over 90 Alan Ritchey, Inc. employees that they would be fired if they did not become formal union members and sign dues deduction cards that authorize the union hierarchy to seize full dues from their paychecks. These actions fly in the face of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in *Pattern Makers v. NLRB* and *Communications Workers of America v. Beck*, a case won by Foundation attorneys. These rulings affirmed the right of private sector employees to refrain from formal union membership and pay a reduced amount of forced dues.

The workers argue that, due to the Teamsters union officials’ campaign of coercion and misrepresentation, not a single employee at the Auburn, Washington facility can be considered a voluntary member of the union. Their charges seek that all union memberships and dues deduction cards be voided until union officials provide the workers with correct information regarding their rights, as well as retroactively refund all dues seized under their illegal threats.

“These shameful tactics demonstrate that the Teamsters union hierarchy is more concerned with collecting forced dues than the interests of the employees they claim to ‘represent,’” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “So long as Washington State employees labor without the protections of a Right to Work law, which makes union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary, these unfortunate abuses are bound to continue.”

Despite Teamsters officials’ deliberate attempts to keep Alan Ritchey employees in the dark, a group of workers did send the union hierarchy objection letters asserting their right to pay a reduced forced dues amount that covers only the union’s proven collective bargaining costs – their right under *Beck*.

Union officials responded by declaring the reduced dues amount to be 98.7 percent of full union dues, but then failed to provide legally-mandated financial disclosure to support their forced dues demands. Teamsters officials also instructed the employees to renew their objections in April, and then annually thereafter during a union-imposed “window period.”

Foundation attorneys contend that such annual objection requirements also violate worker protections outlined by Beck.

Western Michigan Auto Worker Hits UAW Union with Federal Religious Discrimination Lawsuit

**Detroit, MI (September 25, 2006)** – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a western Michigan auto worker today hit the United Auto Workers (UAW) union with a federal civil rights lawsuit for religious discrimination. In violation of federal labor law, union officials have applied a discriminatory policy that forces the employee to pay to charity fees in place of union dues that are higher than fees paid by nonmembers who object for secular reasons – or face termination.

Jeffrey Reed, a resident of Bridgman who assembles Hummer H2s for AM General, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan after UAW union officials refused to grant him an adequate religious accommodation to paying dues to a union that conflicts with his religious beliefs.

“By maintaining a discriminatory policy, the UAW hierarchy appears to have little regard for those who have deep moral objections to the union and its activities,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “But this heavy-handed behavior towards workers who dare dissent comes as little surprise given the UAW bosses’ thuggish history.”

Though Reed prompted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to determine that UAW officials had violated federal law and issue him a “right to sue” letter, the union hierarchy has refused to grant him a proper accommodation.

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, union officials may not force any employee to financially support a union if doing so violates the worker’s sincerely held religious beliefs. To avoid the conflict between an employee’s faith and a requirement to pay fees to a union he or she believes to be immoral, the law requires union officials to attempt to accommodate the worker – most often by designating a mutually acceptable charity to receive the funds.

In spite of the law, UAW officials have forced Reed to pay to charity a $100 premium over the amount that any secular objecting worker is forced to pay. Reed continues to pay the discriminatory amount under protest to prevent UAW officials from ordering him fired.

As a devout Catholic, Reed believes that financially supporting the UAW union violates his sincerely held religious beliefs due to the union hierarchy’s support for special rights for homosexuals and abortion-on-demand.

“UAW officials want to single out Jeffrey Reed to make other employees of faith think twice about refusing to toe the union line,” said Gleason. “Employees should not have to take legal action for union officials to respect their fundamental right to religious freedom.”

Reed points out in his complaint that even full UAW members and secular objectors are allowed to pay an amount less than full dues if they want to cut off the use of their mandatory union dues for political activities.

Federal Court Decree Forces Union and State of Ohio to End Statewide Religious Discrimination

**Columbus, OH (September 6, 2006)** – Resolving a case brought by an Ohio state employee with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a federal judge signed a decree yesterday settling a religious discrimination lawsuit in union contracts for all state workers. The consent decree re-affirms that all public sector employees who have sincere religious objections to union affiliation cannot be forced to associate with and pay dues to a union they find objectionable.

The state’s agencies and the union hierarchy were denying, as a matter of policy, religious objections to the payment of forced union dues when objecting employees were not members of certain state-approved churches.

The settlement concludes a lawsuit for systemic religious discrimination filed by Foundation attorneys, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the State of Ohio, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OPEA), the Ohio State Employment Relations Board, the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association (OCSEA) union, and the Ohio Department of Administrative Services.

In a related matter, the EEOC also determined that the OCSEA union illegally retaliated against the worker who brought the original case after objecting to union affiliation on religious grounds. OCSEA union officials’ had filed a retaliatory counter-claim against Glen Greenwood – a 28-year OEPA employee – demanding that he repay the union for all raises and employment benefits he received for the past quarter century.

As a devout Presbyterian, Greenwood believes that supporting the OCSEA union violates his sincerely held religious beliefs because of the union’s support for abortion on demand and special rights for homosexuals.

“This decree stalls state and OCSEA union officials’ systematic religious discrimination against Ohio’s public servants,” stated National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “The union hierarchy’s willingness to violate employees’ religious freedom demonstrates how their interests are squarely at odds with the employees they claim to represent.”

The actions of OCSEA union officials and the state agencies violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Under Title VII, an employee may not be forced to financially support a union if doing so violates his or her sincerely held religious beliefs. To avoid the conflict between an employee’s faith and a requirement to pay fees to a union he or she believes to be immoral, the law requires union officials to attempt to accommodate the employee – most often by designating a mutually acceptable charity to accept the funds.

Stage Employees Union Slapped with Federal Labor Board Charges Challenging Industry-Wide Forced Unionism Scheme

**Minneapolis, MN (August 23, 2006)** — With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a stage technician hit the International Association of Theatrical State Employees (IATSE) union Local 490 with federal charges – challenging an industry-wide forced union dues scheme.

Filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the unfair labor practice charges detail how IATSE union officials successfully threatened to have Gregory Niska and others black listed for exercising their legal right not to join the union. Federal labor law states that employees cannot be forced to join or pay dues to a union prior to 30 days of employment.

Niska and other employees in the theatre industry often take jobs that last less than 30 days, but IATSE officials have entered into contracts with production companies requiring employees to pay union dues as a job condition. The union officials’ actions violate Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the National Labor Relational Act (NLRA).

According to the NLRA, union officials cannot seize forced dues from an employee’s paycheck until after he has completed at least 30 days with the same employer. The IATSE union hierarchy, however, routinely ignores such legally-mandated grace periods and instead requires dues payment upon 30 days of work in the industry – even if no one project lasts 30 days. Upon 30 days in the industry, the union hierarchy illegally demands that theatre workers pay the union annual – as well as other various unexplained – forced dues or face blackballing from many projects.

The NLRB charge details how when Niska exercised his legal right not to pay dues to or join the union, IATSE officials placed Niska on a Do Not Hire list and notified at least one of his employers that he was “ineligible to work” at which point the employer chose not to hire Niska “in order to avoid complications.”

“With this illegal policy, IATSE union officials are extorting money out of theatre workers who are just trying to get a break,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The union hierarchy is more concerned with stuffing its coffers with forced dues than promoting the interests of the workers union officials supposedly represent.”

The NLRB will investigate to decide whether to prosecute the union to remedy the allegations set forth in Niska’s charges.

Auto Union Hit with Federal Charges For Bullying Nurses Seeking to Remove Union

**Toledo, OH (July 31, 2006)** – For the second time in four months, United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials face federal labor board charges for violating the rights of nurses at St. Vincent Mercy Medical Center. The latest charge, filed by St. Vincent nurse Amy Anderson, details union officials’ campaign of bullying and intimidation as Anderson and others sought to collect signatures from their co-workers to throw the unwanted union out of their workplace.

The nurse’s unfair labor practice charge against the UAW union and its Local 12, filed with the assistance of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, lists numerous examples of union agents’ “thuggish and unlawful activities” including surveillance of nurses, writing down license plate numbers, stalking employees, massing around employees who sought to sign the decertification petition, verbal and physical intimidation of nurses and threats against employees seeking decertification.

The alleged harassment took place at and around the medical center including in the cafeteria, parking lots and even in bathrooms.

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

“UAW union officials have unleashed a shameless campaign of intimidation upon St. Vincent nurses in their lust to preserve the flow of forced union dues,” 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.”

Previously, four nurses from St. Vincents filed federal charges with the Board against the UAW union and its Toledo Local 12 for violating their rights by threatening to have nurses fired, despite failing to inform the employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership and the right to pay a reduced fee in lieu of full union dues. Under the Foundation-won United States Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck, union officials must inform workers of their right to remain nonmembers or resign from formal union membership and to refrain from paying for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities.

Tired of union officials’ mistreatment, a group of nurses formed “Nurses For A Union-Free St. Vincents” (www.NursesKnowTheTruth.bravehost.com) with the goal of decertifying the unwanted automotive union.

Court Gives Green Light to Employees’ Federal Racketeering Lawsuit Against Union and Phone Book Company

**Phoenix, AZ (July 12, 2006)** – A federal judge has cleared the way for a lawsuit against Dex Media, the official publisher of phone books, and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 1269 union by denying motions to dismiss by union and company lawyers.

Five Dex Media employees filed a federal racketeering lawsuit last September with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys. Filed in U.S. District Court, the lawsuit alleges an elaborate scheme in which the employer, the IBEW union local, and two IBEW union agents working for Dex engaged in systematic violations of company policy and collective bargaining agreements in order to give preferential treatment to union officials at the expense of rank-and-file employees.

The workers allege that union agents have not only used their power to create labor strife for their own personal profit, but they have also cheated other workers out of earnings through the manipulation of a complex performance-based pay system used for workers selling advertising in Dex’s publications. In effect, the ill-gotten commissions the union agents improperly received raised the bar against which the other workers’ compensation packages were determined.

The suit also alleges that by knowingly aiding the union agents as they repeatedly broke company rules to increase their performance-based pay, Dex effectively bribed the union agents to act against the workers’ interests. Some of the methods used to increase the union agents’ compensation include reassigning to the union officials lucrative accounts that should have been assigned to other workers, giving the union agents “double commissions” for sales made by other workers, and allowing the union officials to regularly sell “group ads” allowing their customers to have better ad placement than would normally be warranted, all practices explicitly forbidden by Dex written policy.

Because of the pattern of illegal activity by Dex, the Local 1269 IBEW union, and the union’s agents, the suit lists five counts for violating the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and two counts for violating the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. The RICO statutes are best known for having been used to prosecute criminals for Mob and gang activities.

“This clears the path for these employees to seek justice from these union officials who have been stealing from the very workers they claim to represent,” said National Right to Work Foundation vice president Stefan Gleason.

Now that District Court Judge Murguia has denied the motions to dismiss, proceedings can continue so that the wronged employees can have their day in court. After the case was originally filed, Dex Media was acquired by RH Donnelley for a reported $9.5 billion. Plaintiffs’ attorneys may amend the complaint to include any post-merger racketeering that has occurred under RH Donnelley’s watch.

Fox 5-TV Producer Hits Union with Federal Charges for Coercion and Threats Against Job

**Washington, DC (June 27, 2006)** — With free legal help from the National Right to Work Foundation, a WTTG-TV (Fox 5) producer filed federal charges against the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) union after its officials threatened to have her fired for refusal to support the union. The union brass violated the producer’s rights by making these threats while failing to inform her and her coworkers of their right to refrain from formal union membership and payment of certain dues.

Fox 5 production employee Marianne Krist filed the class-action charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after AFTRA officials failed to provide her and her coworkers with a legally-mandated audit of the union’s expenditures, demanded that they pay union initiation fees, and insisted that she sign a dues “check off” card authorizing the automatic deduction of forced dues from her paycheck.

However, union officials unlawfully failed first to notify the employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership and withhold forced dues spent on activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities.

After Krist refused to pay, the union hierarchy – by letter dated April 17, 2006 – unlawfully threatened her that “without tender of initiation and dues, you may not be employed in AFTRA’s jurisdiction.”

“Union officials are unlawfully retaliating against Krist for refusing to toe the union line,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “These heavy-handed tactics demonstrate how far union officials will go to keep a steady stream of forced union dues flowing into union coffers.”

Under numerous U.S. Supreme Court precedents, including Patternmakers v. NLRB, workers have the right to resign their formal union memberships at any time.

AFTRA union officials’ actions also violated employees’ rights affirmed in the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck. Under Beck, union officials may not compel workers to pay forced union dues for costs unrelated to collective bargaining, and must specifically inform employees of their right to refrain from full dues-paying union membership before seizing any forced union dues from their paychecks.

EEOC Cites Government Employee Union for Illegal Retaliation Against Worker Exercising Religious Freedom

**Columbus, OH (June 20, 2006)** — Following a related and unprecedented Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a determination against the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association (OCSEA) union for illegal retaliation against a worker who objects to union affiliation on religious grounds.

Agreeing with National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, the EEOC found that OCSEA union officials’ retaliatory suit against Glen Greenwood – a 28-year Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) employee – demanding that he repay the union for all raises and employment benefits he received for the past quarter century was unlawful retaliation for his complaint against the union requesting religious accommodation.

The EEOC found the retaliation to be so severe that it could seek up to $300,000 in punitive damages and ask the state to grant Greenwood a promotion.

An earlier charge, also filed for Greenwood with free legal assistance from the Foundation, had already led to a finding by the EEOC that the OCSEA union and the OEPA were guilty of religious discrimination. Despite the EEOC finding, the state’s agencies and the OCSEA union have maintained their practice of denying religious objections to the payment of forced union dues from employees who are not members of certain state-approved churches.

As a devout Presbyterian, Greenwood believes that supporting the OCSEA union violates his sincerely held religious beliefs because of the union’s support for abortion on demand and special rights for homosexuals.

Previously, recognizing a pattern and practice of civil rights infringement, the DOJ filed an unprecedented lawsuit in federal court against the State of Ohio and several state agencies in September 2005 for systemic religious discrimination. The DOJ suit – filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio – names the State of Ohio, the OEPA, the Ohio State Employment Relations Board, the OCSEA union, and the Ohio Department of Administrative Services as defendants.

“This determination from the EEOC and the unprecedented involvement by the DOJ in a case of this nature demonstrates the seriousness of the abuse that Ohio employees face when objecting to union affiliation on religious grounds,” stated National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason.

The actions of OCSEA union officials and the aforementioned state agencies violate Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Under Title VII, an employee may not be forced to financially support a union if doing so violates his or her sincerely held religious beliefs. To avoid the conflict between an employee’s faith and a requirement to pay fees to a union he or she believes to be immoral, the law requires union officials to attempt to accommodate the employee – most often by designating a mutually acceptable charity to accept the funds.