At this week’s AFL-CIO national convention, Richard Trumka is expected to be elected president of the nation’s largest union umbrella organization. The National Right to Work Foundation has prepared a Fact Sheet about Trumka’s record of militancy and disregard for the rule of law.

As president of the United Mine Workers (UMW) union, Trumka led multiple violent strikes. Trumka’s fiery rhetoric often appeared to condone militancy and violence, especially against workers who dared to continue to provide for their families by working during a strike. As a Virginia judge ruled in 1989, "violent activities are being organized, orchestrated and encouraged by the leadership of this union."

Take the murder of Eddie York, a nonunion contractor, who was shot in the back of the head and killed while leaving a worksite in 1993. Trumka and other UMW officials were charged in a $27 million wrongful death suit by Eddie York’s widow. After fighting the suit intensely for four years, UMW lawyers settled suddenly in 1997 -- just two days after the judge in the case ruled evidence in the criminal trial would be admitted.

Later, as Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO, Trumka pleaded the Fifth Amendment before Congress and a court-appointed election monitor over his role in an illegal fundraising scheme to benefit the Teamsters president Ron Carey’s re-election. Trumka has remained in his position ever since despite an AFL-CIO rule (adopted in 1957) which held that union officials who plead the Fifth have “no right to continue to hold office” in the union umbrella organization.

Read more about Trumka's history of condoning union violence and corruption in the Foundation's eye-opening Fact Sheet (PDF).

School Bus Drivers Force AFSCME Union Officials to Respect Their Rights

Lack of Hoosier State Right to Work Law Leads to Employee Abuse

Indianapolis, IN (September 16, 2009) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, three bus drivers have forced union officials to halt their unfair labor practices after union officials rebuffed the workers’ attempts to opt out of union membership and forced them to pay fees spent for union electioneering and other objectionable activities.

In the Foundation-won Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988) decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that union officials can lawfully compel nonmembers to pay union dues as a job condition, but not the part of dues spent for activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events. However, these limited rights have been difficult to enforce, which adds further strength to the case for a state Right to Work law to end the abusive practice of forcing workers to pay dues or be fired.

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 3826 union bosses failed to provide First Student school bus drivers with a notification of their rights under Beck. In March and April 2008, Barry and Connie Hickman sent two letters each to AFSCME Council 62, the regional body which handles the local’s objection policy, objecting to paying for non-bargaining costs they cannot be required to support financially. Thomas Spencer II sent a similar objection letter in May.

But in September, AFSCME union officials deducted forced dues from the paychecks of the Hickmans, Spencer, and other similarly situated employees, even though the employees never authorized dues deduction. Two months later, union bosses threatened that the employees would be fired by First Student if they did not join the union and sign dues deduction authorization cards.

In mid-January, AFSCME union brass finally provided the Hickmans with a notice of the union’s objection policy but informed them that they would need to send new objection letters by January 31, even though they had already each formally objected twice in the last year. Union officials never provided Spencer with such a notice at all and deducted full union dues from his paycheck without his consent.

The settlement requires union officials to post notices informing employees of their right to refrain from formal, full dues-paying membership. Spencer will be reimbursed for the union fees that union officials now admit funded non-chargeable activities.

AFSCME union officials will also provide the employees with an audited breakdown of chargeable expenses, and the workers will have the opportunity to challenge the amount of the reduced fees they will still be forced to pay. To date, 22 states have passed Right to Work protections that ensure employees are not forced to pay any union dues as a condition of employment, but Indiana remains a forced unionism state.

“Only a Right to Work law in Indiana will protect workers from power-hungry union bosses who trick, mislead, and threaten employees to pay union dues to fund their agenda,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “No worker should be forced to associate with a union as a condition of getting or keeping a job.”

Nurse Hits Union Brass with Unfair Labor Practice Charges for Illegal Forced Dues Scheme

Nurses campaigning to strip union officials of their power to get nurses fired for refusing to pay union dues

Warwick, RI (September 23, 2009) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Kent Hospital nurse has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against a local nursing union for illegally attempting to coerce her and other employees into formal, full-dues paying membership.

The charges come just as the nurses are seeking an election to strip the United Nurses and Allied Professionals (UNAP) Local 5008 union hierarchy of all power to compel dues payments as a job condition.

In the 22 states with Right to Work protections, employees cannot be forced to pay any union dues. The U.S. Supreme Court held in the Foundation-won Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988) that union officials in states like Rhode Island, which do not have Right to Work laws, can lawfully compel nonmembers to pay union dues as a job condition, but not the part of dues spent for activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events. Union officials must also provide nonmembers with an independently audited breakdown of union expenditures, and nonmembers may challenge the calculation of the reduced fees.

Local 5008 recently disseminated a “Fact Sheet on Union Dues” to Jeanette Geary and other nurses at Kent Hospital. In the document, union officials told the employees that if they wish to exercise their right to refrain from union membership, they will pay only one dollar less per pay period than union members. But union officials never provided the nurses with the required independent audit of union expenditures necessary to determine whether they are being forced to pay more than allowed under law.

Foundation attorneys argue that Local 5008 union bosses have also implemented an illegal policy designed to force employees into “choosing” automatic deduction of monthly dues over the burdensome alternative of two lump sums paid semi-annually. Union officials have also informed the nurses that dues will be deducted automatically, even if they never authorized the deduction.

The National Labor Relations Board regional director in Boston will now investigate the charges and determine whether to prosecute Local 5008 before an administrative law judge. Geary is also spearheading a campaign to collect signatures from her fellow nurses to conduct a deauthorization election, which would remove the forced-dues clause from the contract.

“Sadly, skirting financial disclosure requirements and trying to coerce nurses like Jeanette Geary into union membership has become standard operating procedure for these union officials,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.

Nonunion Worker Challenges San Diego’s Discriminatory School Construction Scheme

Right to Work attorneys argue pact between San Diego school district and union officials intends to illegally coerce workers into union ranks

San Diego, CA (October 7, 2009) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys today filed federal unfair labor practice charges against local area unions for establishing a discriminatory, union-only construction scheme with the San Diego Unified School District. The agreement enriches union officials, punishes nonunion workers and employers, and sticks taxpayers with the bill.

The discrimination against nonunion construction workers is facilitated by a so-called “Project Labor Agreement” (PLA) – essentially a collective bargaining agreement signed by contractors as a condition of performing work on a government-funded construction project. Arguing that the PLA between the school district and various unions (including the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters and San Diego Building & Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO) illegally discriminates against construction workers who exercise their right to refrain from union membership, Foundation attorneys are defending the interests of the vast majority of construction employees in California who have opted against unionization.

Last November, San Diego voters approved a $2.1 billion school bond, called Proposition S. California law requires that all qualified contractors’ employees complete state-mandated “apprenticeship” programs, but it is illegal under federal law to discriminate against workers or businesses on account of union association. The discriminatory PLA, however, requires workers to go through union-run apprenticeship programs (disqualifying high quality training programs run by employers and other groups), and the subcontracting clause further attempts to coerce even more workers into union ranks.

Foundation attorneys are providing free legal aid to and filing the federal charges for Wesley Fuller, a Brady Company employee who hangs drywall and has completed all state apprenticeship requirements, and all similarly situated employees. But, because Fuller’s particular apprenticeship program was not established through union monopoly bargaining, he is being illegally denied access to employment.

“San Diego residents approved funding for schools, not payoffs to union bosses,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Public agencies owe it to the taxpayers to award contracts to those who will do the best work at the best price, not those who work with bureaucrats to shove a union down their workers’ throats.”

“These union bosses are trying to prevent hard-working, independent-minded employees like Wesley Fuller from providing for their families,” continued Gleason.

The National Labor Relations Board regional director in San Diego will now investigate the charges and determine whether to prosecute the unions before an administrative law judge.

Nonunion Worker Challenges San Diego’s Discriminatory School Construction Scheme

Right to Work attorneys argue pact between San Diego school district and
union officials intends to illegally coerce workers into union ranks

San Diego, CA (October 7, 2009) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys today filed federal unfair labor practice charges against local area unions for establishing a discriminatory, union-only construction scheme with the San Diego Unified School District. The agreement enriches union officials, punishes nonunion workers and employers, and sticks taxpayers with the bill.

The discrimination against nonunion construction workers is facilitated by a so-called “Project Labor Agreement” (PLA) – essentially a collective bargaining agreement signed by contractors as a condition of performing work on a government-funded construction project. Arguing that the PLA between the school district and various unions (including the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters and San Diego Building & Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO) illegally discriminates against construction workers who exercise their right to refrain from union membership, Foundation attorneys are defending the interests of the vast majority of construction employees in California who have opted against unionization.

(Read the full press release)

In The American Spectator, reporter Kevin Mooney interviews Right to Work experts about the hidden payoffs to union bosses tucked away in the thousands of pages of health care overhaul legislation. Here's a sample:

Consider the language contained in section 2531 submerged deep within the House version. Here the bill stipulates that any participating health care employer "provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization."

"This phrase 'competitive for its market' is not defined," said Greg Mourad, the main author of the NRTWC study. "This means the Obama administration will be free to define the phrase using Davis-Bacon standards and this would make it almost impossible for non-union employees to qualify."

The approach is similar to what has been done with apprentice programs in federal construction work, Stefan Gleason, vice-president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, explained.

"This is a scheme that is used to fund union organizations that are supposedly doing job training but are often doing other activities," he said. "The scenario that is set up essentially bblack-balls non-union contractors from even being eligible to work on federal contracts at all. There is a similar strategy at work here with health care."

Read the full article here.

Here on Freedom@Work, we've kept you updated about the Obama Administration's payback after payback to the union bosses who spent over one billion dollars in 2008 getting Barack Obama and other forced unionism proponents elected.

From rolling back union disclosure guidelines to slashing the budget of the Department of Labor's union watchdog agency to blacklistining nonunion construction workers from "stimulus" projects, the Obama Administration hasn't been shy about rewarding union brass.

So Friday's news about the White House's visitor list isn't exactly a shocker, but it says an awful lot about the Administration's priorities: no one has visited the White House more than Service Employees International Union chief Andy Stern.

Stern, of course, is one of the nation's most politically powerful union barons.  Under Stern's reign, the SEIU has also been marked by scandal after scandal, dissatisfied and unhappy workers and union members, and vicious campaigns against workers and employers.

The Charleston Daily Mail recently outlined Mayor Danny Jones' concerns about pending federal legislation, best known as the Police and Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill, that would grease the rails for the forced unionization of every first responder in the country.

"It's going to change things. The relationship (between the city and the police union) will become adversarial," Jones said.

"If you look around the states, the most unionized states are the ones that are the most broke."

Jones is not alone in his position. The National League of Cities and the National Association of Counties both have urged their members to oppose the legislation, with the cities' group issuing a formal call to Congress asking for the act to be rejected.

"The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2009 (H.R. 413) would federalize what has historically been a state and local responsibility. With so many other pressing issues, there is no compelling reason for the federal government to intrude in this arena," the group's letter states.

Mayor Jones isn't the first mayor to stand up to the union bosses.  In July, National Right to Work president Mark Mix wrote in the Washington Examiner about Miami's Manny Diaz, the outgoing president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, who was outraged when the Obama Administration refused to attend the conference's meeting in Providence, RI -- at the request of International Association of Firefighters (IAFF/AFL-CIO) union President Harold Schaitberger.  Mix wrote:

As the national recession and exploding government deficits are forcing mayors across the country to make difficult decisions to keep their cities from going bankrupt, Schaitberger is leading a crusade to intimidate local and state elected officials. Specifically, he and his lieutenants are trying to deter local and state politicians from reforming the outrageous public-safety union pension systems that are driving cities like Providence into insolvency. The Obama White House is apparently eager to go along.

Not long before the mayors' meeting, Schaitberger and the bosses of IAFF Local 799 in Providence announced that they would be setting up a picket line outside the conference. The White House then vowed that no one from the Obama administration would defy the union brass by attending. In a June 5 IAFF union press release, Schaitberger was quoted gloating about the Obama administration's "unqualified support" for "organized labor."

If the Police and Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill becomes law, cities' budget woes will become even more severe, and union brass will attain even more political power to enact their own agenda at the expense of the taxpayers.  For more background on the bill, read this report (PDF) by Stan Greer of the National Institute for Labor Relations Research.