Nurse was never informed of her right to object to full union dues as a nonmember and later had union dues illegally seized from her paycheck by union bosses

Seattle, WA (October 9, 2019) – Staff attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation have just won a settlement for Seattle, Washington-based nurse NancyEllen Elster, after Service Employee International Union (SEIU) 1199NW officials were charged with violating federal labor law by misinforming her about her rights and later enforcing illegal restrictions on her right to stop paying for union political activities and other lawfully “non-chargeable” expenses. The settlement, which validates and remedies her unfair labor practice charge against the union, was approved by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 19 in Seattle.

NancyEllen Elster works at Swedish Medical Center in Seattle, which is under the monopoly bargaining power of the SEIU. Because Washington is not a Right to Work state, she can be required to pay fees to the union as a condition of employment, but the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision limits this to just the portion of union dues directly germane to bargaining.

Elster reported in her unfair labor practice charge against the union that SEIU officials had never properly apprised her or other workers about this right or provided the independent audit of the union’s calculation of its non-chargeable expenses that is required because of Beck. NLRB prosecutors additionally found that union officials failed to disseminate legally required information about the percentage of union fees employees could pay by abstaining from formal union membership.

Elster recounted in her charge that she sent SEIU bosses a letter in April 2019 resigning her membership and demanding that only the reduced amount of union fees permitted under Beck be taken from her wages. Union officials responded that she had missed a “window period” for Beck objections concocted by the union hierarchy. They also claimed that she would have to submit additional arbitrary paperwork to have her rights recognized. Elster had never been informed of this purported “window period” at any time in the past, but SEIU bosses continued to seize full dues from her paycheck in violation of her rights.

The NLRB settlement, won with free legal aid from Foundation staff attorneys, orders SEIU officials to post notices that the union will no longer “apply [its] window period to become Beck objectors in order to foreclose employees resigning their union membership” or “fail … to reduce the monthly fee payment of objecting nonmembers” to the amount directly related to bargaining purposes. SEIU bosses also must refund to Elster fees they exacted from her paycheck in violation of Beck and inform employees who refrain from formal union membership of “the percentage of the fees reduction” they would receive by exercising their Beck rights.

Elster’s settlement comes on the heels of SEIU 775 in Washington State being forced to refund well over $3 million to home-based healthcare providers in the state who asserted in a 2014 lawsuit that the SEIU had diverted a percentage of Medicaid payments from them to the union in violation of their statutory and constitutional rights.

“Whether it’s a nurse in the private sector like NancyEllen Elster, or just private citizens who provide healthcare at home to relatives, SEIU officials are more concerned with stuffing their bank accounts with illegal forced union dues than respecting the legal rights of those they claim to represent,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Beck provides at least a check on this coercive power for private sector workers, but Foundation staff attorneys will keep fighting until no workers in America are forced to sacrifice part of their paychecks to union bosses they oppose.”

Settlements: Union officials must inform employees of their rights to refrain from formal union membership and halt their illegal discipline during or after strikes

Boston, MA (October 2, 2019) – Staff attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation have won favorable settlements for Stop & Shop supermarket employees whose rights were violated by United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) officials before, during, and after the union boss-ordered strike on the grocery chain in April 2019. The extraordinary settlements were directed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 1 in Boston.

Two employees, Matthew Coffey and Saood Rafique, had been misled by union agents from the start of their respective employments into thinking that joining the UFCW was a condition of employment at Stop & Shop. Such an arrangement, sometimes called a “closed shop,” was outlawed by the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947. Having never informed the employees that they had the rights to refrain from formal union membership and to pay reduced fees as nonmembers, UFCW bosses also charged each of them full union dues for years.

After independently learning their rights at the onset of the April strike, both men decided to resign union membership and return to work. UFCW officials then threatened them with illegal union discipline for violating their alleged “membership” oaths.

The settlements require UFCW union officials to post remedial rights notices in over 70 Stop & Shop stores, as well as on the internet and in the union’s monthly newsletter, to properly inform employees of their rights to both abstain from union membership and pay only the amount of union fees directly germane to bargaining. These settlements enforce the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision. The remedial notices also announce that UFCW officials will return to Coffey and Rafique dues seized from them in violation of their Beck rights.

Also included in the remedial notices are declarations that UFCW officials will “process resignations and objections of [all] bargaining unit employees who have resigned” union membership and “will not threaten [employees] with internal union discipline or fines” for returning to work during a strike. The settlements totally vindicate the unfair labor practice charges filed by the two grocery workers.

Both Coffey and Rafique experienced vicious backlash and retaliation from UFCW agents for exercising their right to rebuff the union bosses’ strike orders. Coffey’s initial unfair labor practice charge, filed with free assistance from the Foundation, reports that UFCW agents targeted him with personal slurs, threats of violence, and other forms of harassment after he went back to work.

Rafique asserted in his charge, also filed with Foundation help, that a UFCW steward told other employees not to work with him once the strike concluded “to make his job duties…more difficult to carry out.” After the strike, Coffey received letters from union bosses containing illegal demands that he appear before a UFCW tribunal to face punishment for exercising his right to remain on the job rather than participate in the union boss-ordered strike.

The settlements come amid similar UFCW boss strike threats up and down the West Coast, from California to Washington State. They also occur during continuing tensions arising from the United Auto Workers’ strike against General Motors while its current and former heads are embroiled in a widening fraud and embezzlement investigation that has already led to multiple convictions. Just as Foundation staff attorneys issued a special legal notice in the Spring to workers affected by the Stop & Shop strike, Foundation attorneys have issued a notice of their rights for GM workers affected by the UAW boss strike: www.nrtw.org/UAW-GM.

“This victory for Mr. Rafique, Mr. Coffey, and their co-workers should serve as a reminder to all American employees – and union officials – that the individual rights of workers don’t cease to exist when union bosses call a strike,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Workers have a legal right to defy union boss strike demands, and workers subjected to union threats, harassment or worse for exercising those rights can turn to the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid in holding union bosses accountable for their illegal actions.”

New rule ensures state employees give affirmative and knowing consent before dues are collected from their paychecks

Juneau, AK (September 27, 2019) – Yesterday Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy announced an executive order to help protect the First Amendment rights of all state employees under the 2018 Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision. Under the new rule, the State of Alaska will deduct union fees only from the paychecks of employees who have filed a waiver with the state acknowledging their wishes to have union dues taken from their paychecks despite their right under Janus not to fund any union activities.

In Janus, the Supreme Court ruled that government workers cannot be required to pay union dues or fees and further recognized that the First Amendment is violated when any such payments are collected absent a worker’s clear and knowing voluntary consent.

National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix lauded Alaska’s defense of state workers’ First Amendment rights:

“Every American employee deserves the right to choose, free of coercion or manipulation, who will be his or her voice in the workplace. The Supreme Court in Janus extended this freedom to all public sector employees, and Alaska took a major step forward yesterday in protecting the First Amendment rights of state employees recognized in Janus.

Alaska is proactively ensuring workers are not relinquishing their First Amendment rights absent the clear and knowing voluntary waiver required by the Janus precedent. We urge other states to follow Alaska’s lead and prioritize the constitutional rights of state employees under the Janus precedent.”

Janus was argued and won by Foundation staff attorneys in 2018. Days after the ruling came down, Foundation Legal Director Raymond J. LaJeunesse sent a letter to then-Alaska Department of Administration Commissioner Leslie Ridle and 20 other payroll managers in states with forced union dues for government employees urging them to fully comply with the decision by stopping payments unless employees have given a knowing waiver of their First Amendment right not to fund union activities. The letter points out that the Supreme Court’s decision specifically held that a waiver of such rights “’cannot be presumed[,’ r]ather, to be effective, the waiver must be freely given and shown by ‘clear and compelling’ evidence.”

LaJeunesse’s letter also asserted that, if state comptrollers did not comply with Janus, “Foundation staff attorneys will bring a civil rights action seeking class-wide injunctive relief.” To date, Foundation staff attorneys have filed over 30 lawsuits seeking to enforce workers’ rights under the Janus precedent.

Workers have legal right to rebuff strike demands from UAW officials, several of whom are connected to massive federal corruption and embezzlement investigation

Detroit, MI (September 17, 2019) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys have issued a legal notice to the over 46,000 General Motors employees affected by the strike ordered by United Auto Workers (UAW) union bosses.

The strike order and legal notice come amid an intensifying federal investigation concerning misuse of union funds by UAW executives, which has already yielded criminal charges and FBI raids against sitting and retired union officials, including current and previous UAW presidents. The legal notice informs rank-and-file GM workers of the rights UAW bosses won’t tell them about, including that they have the right to keep working and support their families despite the union boss-ordered strike.

The notice discusses why workers frequently turn to the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid in such situations: “This strike raises serious concerns for employees who believe there is much to lose from a union-ordered strike. That is why workers confronted with strike demands frequently contact the Foundation to learn how they can avoid fines and other vicious union discipline for continuing to report to work to support themselves and their families.”

The full notice can be found at www.nrtw.org/UAW-GM.

It also notes the recent victory Foundation staff attorneys won for a Michigan auto worker whose rights were violated by UAW officials. In a National Labor Relations Board decision earlier this month, the board held UAW officials illegally seized dues from the worker’s paycheck and ordered the union to return the funds.

“Given the swirling federal corruption and embezzlement scandal now engulfing the highest levels of the UAW hierarchy, it is understandable that many rank-and-file GM employees may conclude that this strike is more about distracting from UAW boss misdeeds than what is actually best for rank-and-file workers,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Individual workers must decide for themselves whether abandoning their jobs at the behest of UAW bosses is really what is best for them and their families, especially given recent reports that officials at the highest levels of the UAW hierarchy are in the crosshairs of the FBI.”

“Striking GM workers have the legal right to return to work, but it is imperative they read the full legal notice in order to protect themselves against any UAW officials’ attempts to punish them for returning to work and rebuffing union strike demands,” added Mix.

Original plaintiffs fought for First Amendment Janus rights with National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, now they and eleven others are vindicated

Lansing, MI (September 12, 2019) – As a result of a settlement won earlier this year by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys, thirteen Michigan public school employees have been freed from Michigan Education Association (MEA) union boss demands for illegal dues.

In the case which led to the settlement, MEA officials spent several years trying to exact illegal dues from two employees of the Port Huron Area School District, Linda Gervais and Tammy Williams. Gervais and Williams exercised their right to resign union membership in September 2013, approximately nine months after Michigan enacted Right to Work legislation that protects workers from being forced to pay dues or fees to a union as a condition of employment.

Despite the employees’ resignations and the statute, MEA officials continued to demand that Gervais and Williams pay dues for a period after their resignations, alleging that they had missed a short “escape period” to cut off union dues deductions. MEA continued to demand payments even though a 2014 decision brought by Foundation staff attorneys at the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC) declared the union officials’ “escape period” scheme illegal under Michigan’s Right to Work law.

Gervais and Williams later sued MEA in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan with free legal aid from Foundation staff attorneys. In that lawsuit, Gervais and Williams argued that the MEA’s requests additionally violated the precedent in the Supreme Court case Janus v. AFSCME. The Janus decision, which was argued and won by Foundation staff attorneys in 2018, held that forcing public employees to pay fees to any union as a condition of employment violates the First Amendment.

The two Michigan plaintiffs sought an end to the union’s demands for themselves and any other workers who faced similar demands, along with refunds for all workers who paid dues MEA agents illegally demanded.

Rather than face Foundation staff attorneys and the Janus decision in court, MEA officials settled the case. MEA officials ended their demands to Gervais and Williams for illegal dues, and letters sent from MEA offices to Foundation staff attorneys now indicate that “report[s]… of nonpayment of dues” have been “expunged” for eleven other Michigan public school employees to date.

“Linda Gervais and Tammy Williams stood up for their rights under Michigan’s Right to Work law and the Janus decision, and now they have not only won, but have secured protection for several of their colleagues around The Wolverine State from these illegal dues demands,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “But the fight is far from over. The Foundation will proudly stand with American workers until none are compelled into union membership or paying union fees in order to work.”

Complaint: OAPSE union bosses fought for “escape period” blocking driver’s right to rescind union dues deductions

Cincinnati, OH (September 10, 2019) – A school bus driver for the Ripley Union Lewis Huntington School District has filed a federal lawsuit against the Ohio Association of Public School Employees (OAPSE) after union officials ordered the school district to seize union dues from her paycheck in violation of her First Amendment rights. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

According to Donna Fizer’s complaint, in September 2018 she notified school board officials that she was “immediately withdrawing [her union] membership” and exercising her rights under the Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision to cut off union dues deductions. Janus, which the High Court issued in June 2018, mandates that no public employee can be required to pay union fees as a condition of employment, and that union fees can only be collected from a public employee with an “affirmative and knowing” waiver of his or her First Amendment rights.

The school district treasurer, following Janus, ceased deductions from Fizer’s paycheck shortly after receiving her request. However, OAPSE union bosses quickly countered by filing a grievance which alleged that Fizer did not submit her revocation within a tiny, union-created “escape period” that occurs only 10 days every few years. OAPSE officials demanded in the grievance that the school district continue to seize fees from Fizer as well as “make OAPSE whole for all lost dues.”

Though the district initially rebuffed the union’s request and responded that “the district will honor the Supreme Court ‘Janus Decision,’” later arbitration proceedings between the district and OAPSE came down in favor of the union and upheld enforcement of the narrow “escape period.”

Now, Foundation staff attorneys representing Fizer are taking the battle to federal court, where they argue that “escape periods” impose an illegal hindrance on public employees’ ability to exercise their First Amendment rights under Janus.

“Contrary to the wishes of union bosses, their concocted ‘escape period’ schemes cannot limit public employees’ First Amendment rights to just a few days every few years,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “OAPSE union officials are ignoring the Janus decision so they can greedily continue siphoning off Fizer’s hard-earned money.”

“The Foundation is proud to stand with Donna Fizer and countless other public employees in dozens of cases all across the country who are fighting to force union bosses to respect their First Amendment Janus rights,” added Mix.

Class action lawsuit names Governor DeWine for state’s role in enforcing opt-out requirement that violates U.S. Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME precedent

Columbus, OH (August 27, 2019) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys have just filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, challenging the State of Ohio’s enforcement of illegal restrictions created by AFSCME Council 11 union officials to limit state employees’ First Amendment rights to stop union dues payments. The lawsuit is being filed for five state employees who are receiving free legal aid from the Foundation.

The complaint seeks to ensure that Ohio state workers can freely exercise their constitutional rights under the Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME U.S. Supreme Court decision, which struck down mandatory union fees as a violation of the First Amendment rights of government employees. The Supreme Court recognized that any dues taken without a government worker’s affirmative consent violate the First Amendment, and further made it clear that these rights cannot be restricted absent a clear and knowing waiver of them.

The lawsuit challenges union-created restrictions which block workers from exercising their rights under Janus outside of a brief “escape period” once every three years at the expiration of the union monopoly bargaining contract. AFSCME Council 11 is enforcing such First Amendment restrictions against tens of thousands of state workers.

The lawsuit seeks to end those restrictions and ensure that state workers only have union dues deducted from their paychecks if they have affirmatively opted-in to such payments. Because the state is seizing the dues from workers’ paychecks and enforcing the restriction, Governor DeWine and another state official are named as defendants in the complaint.

“Over a year ago the US Supreme Court ruled that public employees’ financial support of union activities must be completely voluntary, but the state of Ohio continues to enforce illegal union policies that violate the clear standards laid out in the Janus decision,” said National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Governor DeWine and Attorney General Yost should move quickly to stop this widespread violation of the First Amendment rights of Ohio public sector workers and cease collecting union dues from any worker who has not affirmatively consented to pay dues.”

The Ohio government employees’ lead Foundation staff attorney is William Messenger, who argued the Janus v. AFSCME case at the U.S. Supreme Court. Foundation staff attorneys are currently litigating dozens of cases to enforce the Janus decision for workers from coast-to-coast.

Recent cases brought by Foundation staff attorneys demonstrate union officials frequently mislead workers about their rights during a strike

Detroit, MI (Aug 1, 2019) – Staff attorneys from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation have provided a legal notice to Michigan-based employees of the Rieth-Riley Construction Company in the wake of Operating Engineers Local 324 union boss strike demands.

News reports indicate that the strike order affects hundreds of employees who are operating heavy machinery as part of Michigan state projects to repair the state’s highways. The special legal notice informs these affected workers of the rights union officials won’t tell them about, including that they have the right to keep working and support their families despite the union boss-ordered strike.

“The situation raises serious concerns for employees who believe there is much to lose from a union-ordered strike,” the legal notice reads. “Which is why workers frequently contact the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation to learn how they can avoid fines and other vicious union discipline for continuing to work during a strike to support themselves and their families.”

The Foundation’s legal notice informs Rieth-Riley employees of their rights to resign union membership and continue to work during the union-determined strike, complete with example resignation letters. It also notes that workers have the right to revoke their union dues “check-offs,” which authorize their employer to deduct union dues directly from their paychecks. Finally, the notice provides a link to information on how to oust an unwanted union from the workplace, including the process for initiating a National Labor Relations Board-approved decertification vote.

The full notice can be found at www.nrtw.org/rieth-riley/.

The National Right to Work Foundation is the nation’s premier organization exclusively dedicated to providing free legal assistance to employee victims of forced unionism abuse. In California earlier this year, the Foundation represented three Sacramento-based mosquito abatement employees who sued Operating Engineers Local 3 for illegally intimidating them simply because they had sought information on their right to decertify a union. The California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) ruled in favor of the workers in May.

The Foundation also aided employees in the aftermath of the high-profile New England Stop & Shop strike which was ordered by United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union bosses in April. Foundation staff attorneys filed federal charges against the UFCW for two workers who received threats of illegal retaliation after continuing to work during the strike, and provided many more with information on their rights.

“As demonstrated in California earlier this year, Operating Engineers bosses will stop at nothing to ensure workers don’t discover their rights, and that effort will only intensify during this strike,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The Foundation, since its founding in 1968, has been committed to offering free legal aid to workers to protect themselves from union bosses’ coercive tactics which regularly go hand-in-hand with union strike demands.”

Comments to Federal Labor Relations Authority point out that no union dues can be seized unless a federal employee provides a knowing waiver of their First Amendment rights

Washington, DC (Aug 12, 2019) – Today the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed comments with the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) regarding the need for the federal government to fully protect the First Amendment rights of its employees as recognized in the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court case Janus v. AFSCME.

The submission comes after the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) asked the FLRA to solicit public comments on how to proceed with union dues deductions in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.

In Janus, the High Court held that requiring public employees to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment violates their First Amendment rights “by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern.” Justice Samuel Alito further ruled for the majority that no union dues or fees could be taken from a public employee “unless the employee affirmatively consents to pay” using a “freely given” waiver of his or her First Amendment rights.

Consistent with that standard, the Foundation urged the FLRA to issue guidance to agencies that they “must cease deducting union dues from the wages of employees who signed a dues deduction form that does not satisfy the [Janus] standard.” Federal employees who signed dues deduction authorizations before the Janus decision did not knowingly waive their Janus rights. Consequently, union dues cannot legally be deducted from their paychecks.

According to the Department of Labor, nearly one million federal employees (or 26.4% of all federal workers) are union members, most of whom are likely having dues deducted from their paychecks despite never having knowingly waived their First Amendment right not to subsidize union activities as protected by Janus.

Workers who want to voluntarily pay union dues must either provide the government with a valid waiver or pay dues on their own without using taxpayer-funded payroll systems to forward the money to union officials. The comments further argue that, even where workers provide a valid authorization for dues deductions that meets the Janus standard, the government should not block them from revoking that authorization if the request is submitted at any time at least a year after the Janus-complaint authorization was obtained.

Though federal workers have never been required to pay union dues or fees to keep a job, agencies and union officials frequently prohibit employees from stopping the seizure of union dues from their wages except during short annual escape periods. The comments filed by the National Right to Work Foundation say that this practice does not comply with Janus either.

“The Janus precedent is not ambiguous on this issue: Without an affirmative and knowing waiver from public workers, the government cannot collect union dues without violating the First Amendment,” explained National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The government is seizing union dues from close to one million federal workers in violation of the First Amendment, and federal agencies have an obligation to act swiftly to ensure that workers’ Janus rights are fully protected.”

Foundation staff attorneys have been hard at work ensuring that public workers’ constitutional rights under the Janus decision are protected, with more than 30 cases active in federal courts across the country to enforce the landmark ruling.

Today the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced rulemaking to change its policies that permit union officials to block workers from holding decertification votes to remove unions. The alterations incorporate standards established in past NLRB cases argued by Foundation staff attorneys, and urged in comments submitted by staff attorneys to the Board.

National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix issued the following comments regarding the NLRB’s move:

“For years union officials have used a wide range of tactics to suppress the right to vote out a union that is opposed by a majority of workers. Today’s announced rules are a good first step in what needs to be a larger series of reforms that put the rights of workers ahead of the coercive legal powers that have been granted to union bosses. That Big Labor will oppose these proposals that simply make it easier for workers to vote for or against unionization in secret ballot elections demonstrates how much their power derives from legal trickery and not from the voluntary support of rank-and-file workers.”

The announced changes include the elimination of a “bar” blocking workers from voting out a union for a period of time after a union has been installed through a controversial “card check” process and reforms to the NLRB’s “blocking charge” policy that permits union officials to file Unfair Labor Practice charges that then block workers’ right to hold a decertification election, sometimes for years. Both of the proposed changes are reforms that Foundation staff attorneys have long pushed for, including in comments to the NLRB on the election rules submitted in April 2018.

Over the years, Foundation staff attorneys have litigated dozens of cases at the NLRB for workers whose petitions for decertification votes were not processed because of the two policies.