San Diego Gompers Preparatory Academy Charter School Educators Vote Out SDEA Union
Gompers teachers sought to remove union as early as 2019, but union bosses stymied last attempt with unproven allegations and pressure from elected officials
San Diego, CA (June 8, 2023) – Teachers at Gompers Preparatory Academy, a public charter school in the Chollas View neighborhood of San Diego, have successfully voted to remove San Diego Education Association (SDEA) union bosses from the school. The educators received free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
While Gompers teachers have been seeking to exercise their right to free themselves from the SDEA union’s control as early as 2019, the current effort began in March 2023 after a majority of Gompers educators signed a petition asking the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) to hold an employee vote on whether to oust the union (known as a “union decertification vote”). After collecting ballots from Gompers educators from May 10 to June 6, PERB yesterday announced a majority of teachers voted to remove the union.
Union Tactics Delayed Earlier Efforts to Vote Out Unwanted Union
The initial union decertification effort took place not long after SDEA officials gained power at the school in January 2019 via “card check,” a process that bypasses the traditional secret-ballot vote system to install a union. Gompers made an impressive transition to being a union-free charter school in 2005 after years of being plagued by unresponsive union bureaucracies, violence, and poor academic achievement, so many teachers and parents viewed the reinstallation of union monopoly power at the school with suspicion. Some accused SDEA agents of actively sowing division at the school, including by supporting anti-charter school legislation and needlessly disparaging the school’s leadership.
Gompers teachers’ first effort to eliminate the SDEA union stemmed from an October 2019 petition that had the backing of the requisite number of teachers to prompt the PERB to hold a decertification vote. However, SDEA union bosses attempted to avert the election by filing so-called “blocking charges” containing allegations of employer misconduct.
Union officials often manipulate “blocking charges” at the PERB and other state and federal labor relations agencies to stifle worker attempts to eliminate unpopular union “representation.” Despite the PERB never holding a hearing into whether SDEA union bosses’ claims had any merit or whether they were related to the workers’ dissatisfaction with the union, PERB officials denied a decertification election to Gompers educators in October 2020.
Foundation attorneys’ case defending the first petition to remove SDEA union agents from the school also sought to overturn PERB Regulation 32752, which requires PERB agents and attorneys to accept union bosses’ “blocking charge” allegations as true – a stipulation almost guaranteeing union defeat of any worker attempt to vote a union out.
“I chose to work at a school that didn’t have a union and now they’ve come in and they’re running everything about my contract and my work,” Kristie Chiscano, then a Gompers chemistry teacher and proponent of the decertification effort, said at the time.
Union Agents Targeted Teachers Who Led Effort to Vote Out Union
Even worse, shortly after the PERB’s ruling halting the original decertification effort, Chiscano and another Gompers educator filed charges maintaining that SDEA agents targeted them on social media for opposing the union hierarchy. California law makes it illegal for union officials to intimidate or retaliate against employees who exercise their right to refrain from union membership.
Union boss-aligned state legislators even chimed in to pressure Gompers management to give in to union demands. In a letter to Gompers management, then-Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (now an AFL-CIO president) attacked the National Right to Work Foundation for simply providing legal aid to Gompers educators as they sought to exercise their right to hold a decertification election. Gonzalez was best known during her tenure for authoring AB5, a California law that drastically reduced opportunities for freelance workers and independent contractors across the state.
Teachers’ Union Decertification Efforts Expose Massive Power of California Public Sector Unions
Gompers educators submitted the March 2023 petition at the earliest time permitted by California labor regulations, which immunize union officials from employee-led decertification efforts for all but a tiny window while union contracts are active. Now, nearly four years after their original effort began, Gompers educators have finally voted to free themselves from union control. Gompers teachers and Foundation attorneys are still prepared to fight any objections the union files in an attempt to throw out the result.
“Gompers educators witnessed that SDEA union officials were not acting in the best interests of the students or the school community at large, and fought courageously for years to bring back the independent environment that made Gompers a success,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “While we at the Foundation are proud to have helped them win the fight, the hardship these teachers faced just to vote out a union they disapproved of should raise serious questions about union officials’ privileges under California law.”
“Gompers teachers endured years of legal roadblocks just to exercise their rights, and that’s to say nothing of the retaliation they faced from union officials and even pressure from union-label policymakers,” Mix added. “No special interest group in California, or in America, should wield this kind of power over teachers and the public education system.”
National Right to Work Foundation Blasts FLRA Ruling Trapping Blue Ridge Parkway Employees in Union
FLRA merged two work units at union officials’ behest with no worker input, now cites merger to deny worker request for vote to remove union
Washington, DC (June 6, 2023) – The National Right to Work Foundation today blasted a Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) ruling barring a group of National Park Service (NPS) employees from exercising their right to vote American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) union officials out of power at their workplace. The FLRA dubiously cited its top-down “merger” of two preexisting work units of NPS employees into one unit as a reason for why the vote shouldn’t proceed.
The affected employees are Blue Ridge Parkway employee Lauren Labrie and her coworkers, who in 2021 backed a petition with enough employee support to prompt the FLRA to hold an election on whether to oust AFGE union officials. Labrie and her colleagues are receiving free legal aid from the Foundation.
National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix criticized the FLRA’s ruling:
“The Biden FLRA has abandoned all pretense of defending employees’ right to freely choose who will speak for them in the workplace with this ruling. Instead of just allowing Blue Ridge Parkway workers to vote on whether they support AFGE, the FLRA has effectively announced to all federal employees that agency bureaucrats can shield union bosses from workers’ will by merging multiple units of employees.
“This is another attempt by Biden Administration officials to expand the influence and power of their political allies within federal and other government unions, all to the detriment of rank-and-file workers who want to exercise their individual rights. Every individual worker should get to decide for him or herself whether or not to affiliate with a union – not have federal bureaucrats thrust union bosses’ so-called ‘representation’ on them against their will, and without even the ability to hold a prompt vote to remove an unwanted union.”
FLRA “Consolidated” Units at Union Behest, Then Stopped Workers from Voting on Union
AFGE union officials petitioned to consolidate Labrie’s work unit and another unit of NPS employees in 2021. A regional FLRA official approved the move in September 2021, without giving employees an opportunity to vote on whether they actually wanted the merger.
Labrie and her coworkers submitted their petition to decertify the union in December 2021. A regional FLRA official dismissed the petition in March 2022, claiming it was blocked by a 12-month “certification bar” stemming from the top-down consolidation of the work units, and that the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute permits such a restriction.
Park Employee’s Brief: Blocking Election Stifles Employees’ Free Choice Rights
After requesting review from the FLRA in Washington, Foundation attorneys argued in a brief that applying a bar to employee-requested elections after agency-imposed unit consolidations violates federal employees’ free choice rights, which the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute was meant to protect.
“In passing the Statute, Congress’ intent was to promote secret ballot elections and employees’ freedom to choose their representative under the Statute,” the brief said. “Not allowing employees to exercise their free choice because the Authority administratively combined two bargaining units undermines Congress’ goal of promoting the right of employees to select their own agent.”
Despite there being no precedent or statutory authorization for blocking employee-requested decertification elections after a top-down unit consolidation, the FLRA in Washington issued a May 2023 decision relying on its own “discretion to regulate representation proceedings” and ruled that a “certification bar” blocked Labrie and her coworkers’ requested vote.
National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys are determining the next steps for Labrie and her coworkers. While, according to the FLRA, Labrie and her coworkers can currently be forced to accept the “representation” of AFGE officials, they and all public sector American employees have a First Amendment right under the Foundation-won 2018 Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision to cut off financial support to a union they oppose.
CUNY Professors’ Lawsuit Challenging Forced Association with Antisemitism-Linked Union Continues at Second Circuit
City University professors challenge NY law that forces them to be represented by hostile union hierarchy
New York, NY (June 5, 2023) – Six City University of New York (CUNY) professors have taken their federal civil rights lawsuit against Professional Staff Congress (PSC) union officials to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The professors, Avraham Goldstein, Michael Goldstein, Frimette Kass-Shraibman, Mitchell Langbert, Jeffrey Lax, and Maria Pagano, charge PSC union bosses with violating the First Amendment by forcing them to accept the union’s monopoly control and “representation” – “representation” the professors not only oppose, but find extremely offensive and in contradiction to their personal beliefs.
The professors, five of whom are Jewish, are receiving free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation and The Fairness Center. They seek to overturn New York State’s “Taylor Law,” which grants public sector union bosses the power to speak and contract for workers, including those that want nothing to do with the union. In addition to opposing the union’s extreme ideology, the professors oppose being forced into a “bargaining unit” of instructional staff who share the union’s beliefs or have employment interests diverging from their own.
The professors’ opening brief at the Second Circuit argues that a lower court’s reliance on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1984 decision in Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v. Knight was misguided. Knight, the brief states, dealt primarily with public employees’ ability to participate in union meetings and not with the professors’ legal argument that being forced to accept the bargaining power and “representation” of union officials is a violation of First Amendment free association rights.
The brief also maintains that the Supreme Court in the 2018 Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision acknowledged that public sector monopoly bargaining is “a significant impingement on associational freedoms.” Other Supreme Court decisions as early as 1944 also recognized problems with monopoly bargaining, the brief notes, including the Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railway Co. decision, in which African-American railway workers challenged a rail union’s racially discriminatory hiring and promotion policies.
“If the First Amendment prohibits anything, it prohibits the government from dictating who speaks for citizens in their relations with the government,” reads the brief. “The State Appellees and CUNY thus necessarily infringe on the Professors’ speech and associational rights by forcing them to accept a hostile political group, which they view as anti-Semitic, as their exclusive agent for speaking and contracting with their government employer.”
Lawsuit: Professors Compelled to Associate with Union Even After Bullying and Threats
The professors’ original complaint recounted that several of the professors chose to dissociate from PSC based on a June 2021 union resolution that they viewed as “anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish, and anti-Israel,” and a host of other discriminatory actions perpetrated by union agents and adherents.
The complaint said Prof. Michael Goldstein “experienced anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist attacks from members of PSC, including what he sees as bullying, harassment, destruction of property, calls for him to be fired, organization of student attacks against him, and threats against him and his family.” Goldstein has needed a guard to accompany him on campus, the complaint noted.
Prof. Lax, the complaint explained, already received in a separate case a letter of determination from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) “that CUNY and PSC leaders discriminated against him, retaliated against him, and subjected him to a hostile work environment on the basis of religion.” Prof. Lax “has felt marginalized and ostracized by PSC because the union has made it clear that Jews who support the Jewish homeland, the State of Israel, are not welcome,” said the complaint.
Suit Seeks Overturn of New York State Law Forcing Union Power on Professors & Damages
The lawsuit seeks to stop the defendants from “certifying or recognizing PSC, or any other union, as Plaintiffs’ exclusive representative without their consent” and “enforcing any provisions…that require Plaintiffs to provide financial support to PSC.” It also demands that the court declare “Section 204 of the Taylor Law…unconstitutional under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to the extent that it requires or authorizes PSC to be Plaintiffs’ exclusive representative…”
“No American worker should be forced to associate with union officials and union members that openly denigrate their identities and deeply-held beliefs,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Yet, New York State’s Taylor Law grants union officials the power to force dissenting workers under the ‘exclusive representation’ of a union hierarchy. As these CUNY professors have experienced, granting union officials the power to nullify public employees’ free association rights in this way breeds serious harm and discord among employees.”
“Not just in Janus v. AFSCME, but in decisions going back decades, the Supreme Court has questioned the constitutionality of union monopoly bargaining,” Mix added. “Federal courts must take action to ensure that government employees can freely exercise their right to dissociate from an unwanted union for religious, cultural, financial, or any other reasons.”
“Our clients want to vindicate their First Amendment rights and win their independence from a union they believe hates them,” commented Fairness Center President and General Counsel Nathan McGrath. “If successful, their lawsuit could transform the relationship between public-sector unions and employees in New York and, potentially, beyond.”
Foundation Issues Statement on Glacier Northwest SCOTUS Decision
The Supreme Court of the United States has just ruled that union bosses who orchestrate property damage as part of a strike order aren’t immune to liability in state court.
In Glacier Northwest v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 174, an 8-1 SCOTUS majority rejected Teamsters officials’ argument that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) prevented Glacier Northwest, a Washington State-based concrete company, from suing the union in state court for ordering cement truck drivers to abandon their trucks and leave copious amounts of cement spoiled and completely unusable.
National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix issued the following statement on the ruling:
The Supreme Court correctly ruled that union officials should not be granted immunity from state lawsuits over deliberate property damage perpetrated during union strike actions. The issue in Glacier Northwest, however, represents only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to union bosses’ special legal privileges – especially concerning the powers union officials have over rank-and-file workers.
As the Foundation noted in its amicus brief in the case, beyond the issue of deliberate property damage, union officials have vast special powers and immunities that no other private entity or individual enjoys. This long list includes not only forcing workers under union ‘representation’ they oppose and then extorting workers to pay union fees or else be fired, but also a court-created exemption from federal prosecution for extortionate violence if it is pursued for so-called ‘legitimate union objectives.’
Ultimately, this case shows how far courts and lawmakers have to go in order to level the playing field and stop allowing union bosses to play by a different set of rules from those that apply to all other citizens and private entities.
The Foundation’s amicus brief in Glacier Northwest can be viewed here. Mark also penned an op-ed for Fox News explaining the breadth and depth of union boss legal privileges.
National Right to Work Foundation Issues Legal Notice to Starbucks Employees as Multiple Locations Seek to Boot Unions
Notice contains details on how employees can petition for union decertification vote, as well as how to resign membership and cut off dues
Washington, DC (May 23, 2023) – After being in contact with multiple Starbucks workers, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation today issued a special legal notice to Starbucks employees who are interested in removing union control in their workplace. The legal notice is available at the Foundation’s website here: https://www.nrtw.org/starbucks/.
The Right to Work Foundation is the nation’s premier organization dedicated to defending workers whose rights have been violated by forced unionism abuses. Foundation staff attorneys are already assisting Starbucks employees at the Starbucks Reserve Roastery in Manhattan, NY, in exercising their right to vote unwanted union officials out of their store, and similar efforts are taking place at Starbucks locations in Buffalo, NY, and Rochester, NY. At the New York Roastery location, a majority of the employees signed the petition asking for a vote to remove the union.
“The Foundation wants you to learn about your legal rights from independent sources,” the notice says. “You should not rely on what self-interested union officials tell you.”
In Addition to Seeking to Vote Out Union, Employees Can Take Individual Steps to Resist Union Activity
The legal notice advises Starbucks workers of their right to petition the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to hold a vote among employees on whether a resident union should be ousted from the workplace, a process known as a decertification vote. However, it cautions workers that this process is complex and prone to manipulation from union officials, and for that reason workers should consider obtaining Foundation legal aid in navigating the process.
The notice also advises employees of actions they can take as individuals to disaffiliate from the union, including how to exercise their right to resign union membership, revoke cards authorizing direct union dues deductions, and potentially stop funding union activities. The notice provides sample letters to workers interested in exercising those rights.
“If you work in a state that lacks Right to Work protections, union officials with a monopoly bargaining agreement can unfortunately force you to pay some union fees in order to keep your job. However, there are still limitations on how much and under what circumstances you can legally be required to pay,” the notice reads, while counseling such workers of their right to cut off dues payments for union politics as per the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision. “If you work in a state with Right to Work protections, you have a right to opt-out of all union financial support.”
“As many Starbucks locations pass the one-year anniversary of unionization, Starbucks employees are now able to hold votes to remove the union, a right many are now seeking to exercise,” commented National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “No one who claims to be pro-worker should oppose simply letting these workers hold a secret ballot vote to determine if they oppose union affiliation.”
“Unfortunately, between union officials who prioritize their own power over the wishes of rank-and-file workers, and an NLRB that is actively seeking to make it harder for workers to even hold decertification votes, it is more important than ever that workers fully understand these legal issues,” Mix added. “That’s why workers should carefully read our legal notice and know that they can request free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation for help in protecting their legal rights.”
Second Group of Mankato Mayo Clinic Employees Petition for Vote to Oust Union from Workplace
Nursing support staff and others in 200-person unit demand vote to remove AFSCME union officials after nurses voted MNA union out last summer
Mankato, MN (May 12, 2023) – Less than a year after Mankato Mayo Clinic nurses voted the Minnesota Nurses Association (MNA) union out of the facility, Mankato Mayo nursing support staff, clerical staff, and environmental staff are undertaking a similar effort. Mankato Mayo employee Melody Morris, with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, filed a petition on May 9 asking the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to hold a vote at the clinic on whether American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) officials should be removed.
A majority of Morris’ colleagues within the work unit under the control of AFSCME union officials supported her petition. Under NLRB rules, a union “decertification” petition containing the signatures of at least 30% of workers in a unit is enough to prompt the NLRB to administer a union decertification election.
Workers often seek free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation in exercising their right to vote out an unpopular union because the NLRB’s process for doing so is convoluted and prone to union boss gamesmanship. The right to decertify is especially important for Mankato Mayo Clinic employees and other workers across Minnesota because, due to the state’s lack of Right to Work protections, union officials can force workers under their control to pay dues as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In contrast, in Right to Work states, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
The Foundation-backed 2020 NLRB “Election Protection Rule” curtailed the non-statutory “blocking charge” policy that union bosses used to prevent rank-and-file employees from exercising their right to vote out a union. Prior to the rule, union officials could easily manipulate such “blocking charges” to stop workers’ requested votes from taking place for months or even years by making one or multiple unproven allegations against the employer.
The “Election Protection Rule” stopped the most common blocking charge tactics used by union lawyers to stall worker-requested votes, and in most cases permitted the immediate release of the vote tally. Despite numbers showing increased worker interest in voting out unwanted union officials across the country, Biden-appointed NLRB officials in Washington have initiated rulemaking to roll back the Foundation-backed reforms, including those targeting “blocking charges.”
More and More Minnesota Healthcare Workers Dissociate from Union Officials
Morris and her colleagues’ petition comes amid a surge in interest among Minnesota healthcare employees in exercising their right to vote out union officials they oppose. In addition to Mankato Mayo Clinic nurses, nurses from Mayo’s St. James, MN, branch removed the AFSCME Council 65 union from their hospital last August with Foundation aid. Employees from four Cuyuna Regional Medical Center locations across the Brainerd Lakes region of Minnesota also sought Foundation aid in their decertification effort against Service Employees International Union (SEIU) officials last year.
Minnesota union officials seem unwilling to examine why growing numbers of workers want them ousted. A Minnesota Reformer profile on MNA President Mary Turner reported that Turner believes “it’s the nurses in Mankato, not the union, who need to change their approach,” and also quoted her as saying that Mankato Mayo nurses “[are] going to have to prove to us that they want the union because they lost it.”
“Minnesota healthcare workers may have any number of reasons for opposing monopoly union ‘representation’ in their workplaces: divisive union politics, inefficient work rules, or strikes that take them away from patients,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But one thing is for certain: They are increasingly exercising their right to boot out unwanted unions, and the push from union officials and their allies at the highest levels of government to coerce and trap workers in unions shows a preference for power over worker freedom.”
“Minnesota employees who are interested in exercising their right to be free of union control should contact Foundation staff attorneys for free help in exercising their rights,” Mix added.
Orlando Airport Fueling Employees Successfully Oust USWU Union Officials Who Tried to Stop Union Decertification Vote
USWU outrageously claimed that vote among approximately 1,000 PrimeFlight employees across country was necessary to boot union just at Orlando Airport
Orlando, FL (May 2, 2023) – Robert Anderson and his fellow PrimeFlight Aviation Services fueling employees at Orlando International Airport have successfully ousted United Service Workers Union (USWU) Local 74 union officials from their workplace. Anderson and his colleagues received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation in removing the unwanted union.
Anderson and his coworkers submitted a majority-backed petition to the National Mediation Board (NMB) in March 2023. The petition contained enough employee support to prompt the agency to conduct a union “decertification” investigation at his facility. However, union officials objected to letting the employees vote, outrageously claiming that Anderson and his coworkers were actually part of a nationwide “system” and the union decertification election would need to be conducted among almost every PrimeFlight employee in the country – even though Anderson and his colleagues simply wanted to dismiss the union from their Orlando workplace alone.
Foundation Attorneys Expose Outrageous Union Scheme to Stop Vote
Foundation attorneys refuted union arguments in a position statement, contending that the union’s position was completely at odds with the Railway Labor Act’s (RLA) basic purposes, which ensure that “employees can [choose] to join or refrain from unionization, and that they are entitled to the fullest freedom in making that choice.” The RLA governs private sector labor relations in the air and rail industries.
“The [union] reasoning is both illogical and devastating to employee free choice,” said Foundation attorneys’ statement. “Local 74 would require some 1,000 PrimeFlight fuelers, at all locations, to weigh-in on whether the employees at one specific location in Orlando should be represented by Local 74, even though those other employees cannot possibly have any…interest in the representational choices of the Orlando location’s employees.”
Further, Foundation attorneys pointed out that USWU union officials’ position was especially suspect considering “the fuelers at other locations are represented by unions other than Local 74” (emphasis added) and have completely different contracts and working conditions. Had the USWU officials’ position been adopted, in order to eject a union for workers at one location, the workers would need signatures from hundreds or potentially thousands of workers at other locations. That could include not only workers covered by different unions with entirely different monopoly bargaining contracts, but also nonunion workers at other facilities who are already free to negotiate their own terms of employment.
USWU Officials Back Down, Abandon Orlando Airport
After Foundation attorneys countered the union’s contentions, USWU union officials quickly backed down and disclaimed interest in maintaining power over Anderson and his coworkers. Likely wanting to avoid a vote of the rank-and-file fueling employees who petitioned for the decertification vote, union officials issued a letter on April 21, 2023, declaring that the union “abandons its representative status and disclaims interest in the aforementioned employees.”
The NMB closed the case on April 26, 2023, meaning Anderson and his fellow fuelers are officially free of the union.
Foundation attorneys have continuously sought to safeguard workers’ right to decertify unwanted unions at the NMB. In 2020, the Foundation filed a brief at the agency opposing the AFL-CIO’s effort to bring back the arbitrary “straw man” rule, which required workers interested in decertifying a union to solicit support for a fake “straw man” union just to vote out incumbent union officials.
“USWU union officials’ ridiculous proposal of a nationwide decertification vote disrespects the rights of rank-and-file employees to vote out union bosses they oppose,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “We applaud Mr. Anderson and his fellow airplane fuelers for exercising their rights even in the face of such opposition from USWU union officials, but there are likely many other employees across the country whose efforts to oust an unpopular union have been stifled by such legal maneuvering. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys stand ready to aid employees who experience similar barriers to their rights.”
Connecticut State Trooper Wins $260,500 Settlement in Federal Lawsuit Against Police Union and Department Officials
Trooper was demoted after he abstained from funding union politics, CSPU union has now backed down and settled case
Hartford, CT (April 28, 2023) – Connecticut State Trooper Joseph Mercer has won a settlement in his federal civil rights lawsuit against the Connecticut State Police Union (CSPU) and Department of Emergency Services (DESPP) officials, in which he charged them with illegally demoting him for opposing union membership and politics. Mercer received free legal aid from staff attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Mercer’s suit began in 2016, when he accused the CSPU union, CSPU President Andrew Matthews, and DESPP Commissioner Dora Schriro of knocking him out of a prestigious Operations Sergeant position after he exercised his First Amendment rights to abstain from CSPU membership and not pay dues to support the union’s political activities. The department placed Mercer in a position that offered fewer overtime opportunities and involved less time in the field.
In August 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut denied motions to dismiss the case filed by CSPU and state officials, allowing the case to proceed. Pressure on defendants increased in May 2022, when the District Court ordered DESPP Commissioner James Rovella, who had replaced Schriro, to turn over additional discovery.
Now, CSPU and DEPP officials have backed down and settled the case. As part of the settlement, Mercer will receive more than two hundred thousand dollars from CSPU and DEPP.
Connecticut State Trooper Groundlessly Fired After Objecting to Union Politics
In May 2015, Sergeant Mercer was appointed Operations Sergeant of the Emergency Services Unit, a prestigious command position that entails significant responsibility for Emergency Services training and field operations. Although Sergeant Mercer had seventeen years of experience, in June 2015, CSPU President Matthews filed a grievance over Sergeant Mercer’s appointment.
Matthews’ grievance claimed that there had been no “selection process” to fill the position, despite the fact that none of Sergeant Mercer’s union-member predecessors had undergone any particular kind of selection process before they got the job.
Mathews filed a second baseless grievance, alleging Mercer had mismanaged an incident involving an armed suspect barricaded in a hotel. State police officials had never expressed dissatisfaction with how Mercer handled the situation.
In October 2015, after meeting in private with the union president, the then-Commissioner of the DESPP transferred Mercer out of his Operations Sergeant position to an administrative post. That new position gave Mercer substantially fewer opportunities to work in the field or to accrue overtime pay. Prior to this demotion, Mercer had received no warnings, reprimands, or other disciplinary actions regarding the incident referenced in Matthews’ grievance. Mercer filed his lawsuit with Foundation aid in February 2016.
Mercer’s Foundation-won settlement now requires CSPU and the State to pay $260,500.00.
Public Servants Have First Amendment Right to Stop Supporting Union Politicking
“We at the Foundation are proud to have defended Sergeant Mercer’s rights and secured him a settlement that vindicates his free association,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “However, it’s disgraceful that CSPU union officials targeted Mercer, a dedicated public safety officer, with such a vicious retribution scheme in the first place. Public servants should not have to endure multi-year lawsuits just so they can refrain from supporting union politics they oppose.”
“Situations like these demonstrate why the Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME decision, which the U.S. Supreme Court decided while Mercer’s case was ongoing, is so important,” Mix added. “As was obvious in Mercer’s case, unelected public sector union bosses often wield their enormous clout over government to serve the union’s private interests over the public interest. That’s why it’s vital that public employees can exercise their First Amendment Janus right to cut off all financial support of union bosses who are contorting government in this way.”
Louisville Ford Assembly Plant Employee Wins Refund in Case Charging UAW Union Officials and Ford with Illegally Seizing Dues Money
Embattled UAW and Ford back down and settle case; numerous UAW officials currently serving sentences for embezzlement and corruption
Louisville, KY (April 26, 2023) – A Ford Louisville Assembly plant employee has just prevailed in her federal cases against the United Automobile Workers (UAW) Local 862 union and her employer. Shiphrah Green charged union officials in October 2022 with illegally seizing dues money from her paycheck and threatening her job after she exercised her right to refrain from union membership. Green filed a similar charge against Ford for its role in the scheme.
Green received free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys, who asserted her rights before National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 9 in Cincinnati. In addition to the illegal dues deductions and threats, Green’s October 2022 charges also detailed that UAW and Ford officials had forced her to navigate several unnecessary and unlawful steps to end her financial support for the union.
Foundation attorneys argued that the UAW union and Ford violated her rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which protects American private sector employees’ right to refrain from any or all union activities. Additionally, Kentucky is a Right to Work state, meaning that state law prohibits union officials and employers from requiring workers to join or pay union dues or fees to keep their jobs.
Now, pursuant to settlements, Green will be reimbursed for all the dues illegally seized from her paycheck. UAW and Ford must also post notices informing workers that they will no longer continue to take dues from employees’ paychecks after they have resigned from the union, or create unlawful roadblocks to terminating membership or stopping dues deductions.
UAW Officials Block Employee from Exercising Basic Rights
According to her charges, Green sent correspondence to both UAW and Ford officials on April 21, 2022, informing them she was resigning her union membership and cutting off union dues deductions from her wages. Neither granted her request, and Green instead received an email from UAW Local 862’s president notifying her that she must come to the union hall to be shown the purportedly “correct” method to leave the union.
At a meeting with union officials at the UAW union hall on April 25, 2022, UAW officials interrogated Green about why she wanted to leave the union. They also demanded she sign a letter listing “benefits” Green would supposedly forgo if she went through with exiting the union.
The charge contended that NLRB precedent prohibits requiring workers to sign such a document so they can exercise their right to end their union membership and stop dues deductions. UAW Local 862’s president apparently went even further. According to the charge, he told Green “if it were up to me, you’d lose your job for leaving the union.”
As this chain of events with the union was unfolding, Green was also trying to get Ford management to end the dues deductions. This also proved fruitless, as Ford officials gave her several confusing responses and even told her at one point that, under the union monopoly bargaining contract, she could only cease dues deductions in February 2023 – even though paperwork she signed previously stated it could be revoked at will.
The charges contended that Ford violated federal law by “continuing to take full union dues” from Green’s paycheck at union bosses’ behest even after she had requested that they stop. The charges also stated that UAW Local 862 violated the law by continuing to accept those illegally-seized dues, by “restricting her union membership resignation, and by making threatening comments that would chill an ordinary employee’s exercise of Section 7 rights.”
After an investigation into the charges, NLRB Region 9 agreed that Ford and UAW officials’ actions violated federal law. To avoid a federal prosecution for their illegal actions, the company and union quickly settled.
Green’s Foundation-won settlements mandate that Ford and the UAW union return all money taken from Green’s paycheck since April 21, 2022, the date she first tried to resign from the union. UAW officials must also abstain from threatening that “you should or could incur disciplinary problems and job loss with Ford Motor Company Louisville Assembly Plant . . . because you inform us that you are resigning from the union.”
Systemic UAW Disrespect for Workers’ Rights May Be Rampant at Louisville Ford Plant
“The recent federal probe into UAW officials stealing and misusing workers’ money has sent multiple top UAW bosses to jail, and uncovered a shocking culture of contempt for workers’ rights,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “As Ms. Green’s case shows, these issues are systemic and widespread, and any other Louisville Ford Assembly Plant worker facing UAW union boss attempts to coerce union membership or dues payment should contact the Foundation for free aid in protecting their legal rights.”
“Louisville Ford Assembly employees should know that, under Kentucky’s Right to Work law, union bosses can’t force them to join or pay any money to the union as a condition of employment,” Mix added.
National Right to Work Foundation Files Brief at Michigan Supreme Court Blasting TPOAM Union’s Forced Fee Scheme
Union “fee-for-grievance” scheme unlawfully pressures employees to become union members; Right to Work repeal does not make scheme legal
Lansing, MI (April 21, 2023) – The National Right to Work Foundation filed an amicus brief at the Michigan Supreme Court, opposing a scheme used by Technical, Professional, and Officeworkers Association of Michigan (TPOAM) union officials that weaponizes the union’s control over the grievance process to force nonmember public employees into paying fees to the union.
The case at issue is Technical, Professional and Officeworkers Association of Michigan (TPOAM) v. Daniel Lee Renner, in which Saginaw County employee Daniel Renner is challenging TPOAM union bosses’ so-called “fee-for-grievance” arrangement. Under it, union officials deprive Renner and other nonmember public employees of any power to file grievances themselves, and instead mandate that they pay fees to use the union’s grievance system – fees which often amount to a sum far greater than union dues.
Both the Michigan Employment Relations Committee (MERC) and the Michigan Court of Appeals have already rejected union officials’ arguments that they can refuse to file grievances for nonmembers unless nonmembers pay union fees. In Renner’s case, union officials demanded $1,290 from him simply to process his grievance to the first stage. Additionally, the union made clear to Renner that if the actual costs were higher as the proceeding continued, he would be responsible for more payments.
The current filing is the second amicus brief that the Foundation has submitted in the case. Notably, it addresses how Michigan legislators’ recent move to repeal the state’s popular Right to Work laws does not save the “fee-for-grievance” scheme from illegality. Michigan’s Right to Work protections prohibit union bosses from forcing workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment, and remain valid until the repeal takes effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns, which is expected to be sometime in early 2024.
Forcing Nonmembers to Pay into Union Grievance System Violates Free Choice Rights
The brief refutes union arguments that the “fee-for-grievance” scheme does not restrain or coerce Renner or other union nonmembers in violation of their right under Michigan’s Public Employment Relations Act (PERA) to refrain from union activity. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law that PERA is based on, has consistently been interpreted “more broadly than simply prohibiting union or employer violence or heavy handed reprisals,” the brief points out.
The brief notes that the 1953 National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case Hughes Tool Co. specifically held that a union’s refusal to process a nonmember’s grievance because he did not pay a fee violates workers’ right to refrain from union activity under the NLRA. “The NLRB has consistently reaffirmed these principles and Hughes Tool remains good law today,” the brief says.
In addition to ignoring a long line of NLRB precedents, the brief concludes, “TPOAM cavalierly defends its illegal fee on the basis that Renner made a choice to be a nonmember and he is the one requesting TPOAM assistance.” However, because Renner has a right under Michigan law to abstain from union activity, “[t]he fact TPOAM treated him differently because he exercised that statutory right is evidence it committed an unfair labor practice, not a defense.”
“TPOAM union officials’ scheme forcing nonmember public employees to pay into a union grievance system is illegal, just as it was both before and during Right to Work’s enactment in Michigan,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “As the Foundation’s amicus brief shows, TPOAM’s position ignores mountains of precedent and lets union bosses keep mandating fees designed to force dissenting workers into full union membership, in obvious violation of their rights.”
“Michigan public employees should also know that, as per the landmark Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME U.S. Supreme Court decision, they can’t be fired for refusal to join or financially support a union,” Mix added.
