Harris v. Quinn Supreme Court Update
Regular Freedom@Work readers may remember the case of Pam Harris, an Illinois woman who is challenging an SEIU scheme aimed at forcing her and other homecare providers into union ranks. For the past several years, Harris has received free legal assistance from Foundation staff attorneys.
In November 2011, Harris filed a a petition for a writ of certiorari at the Supreme Court, challenging the SEIU’s forced-unionism scheme on the grounds that it violates homecare providers’ freedom of association and freedom of speech. Last June, the Supreme Court asked for a brief on the issues presented from the Solicitor General, a move that could indicate heightened interest in the case. The Solicitor General’s brief was filed in early May. Harris’s Foundation-provided staff attorney submitted a reply shortly thereafter.
Although we hoped the Supreme Court would announce whether it would take the case this morning, it was not on today’s orders list, meaning the case will be conferenced again this Thursday. That makes this coming Monday (June 17th) the likely day the Court will announce whether or not it will take the case.
For more information on the case, including links to Harris’s petition and several amicus curiae briefs filed in support of her arguments, check out Scotusblog.
Worker Files Federal Charge After Vehicle Firebombed During Union-Instigated Strike
Worker Files Federal Charge After Vehicle Firebombed During Union-Instigated Strike
Worker charges union militants threatened non-striking workers and their families; police documents show two vehicles damaged
Chicago, IL (June 6, 2013) – A Chicago-area South Water Market, Inc. worker has filed a federal charge against a Chicago Teamster union local alleging that union militants threatened him, his family and his property, and that his personal property was damaged shortly after he received those threats.
The worker filed the charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Chicago with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The Teamsters Local 703 union has been on strike at South Water Market. However, some of the workers are not union members and refuse to abandon their jobs. Under federal law, workers who are not union members cannot be disciplined for continuing to work during a strike.
According to the charge, union agents harassed and threatened nonmember workers who continue working to support their families. In the charge, the worker alleges that his personal property was damaged soon after the threats.
Worker Files Federal Charge After Truck Firebombed During Union-Instigated Strike
Chicago, IL (June 6, 2013) – A Chicago-area South Water Market, Inc. worker has filed a federal charge against a Chicago Teamster union local alleging that union militants threatened him, his family and his property, and that his personal property was damaged shortly after he received those threats.
The worker filed the charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Chicago with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The Teamsters Local 703 union has been on strike at South Water Market. However, some of the workers are not union members and refuse to abandon their jobs. Under federal law, workers who are not union members cannot be disciplined for continuing to work during a strike.
According to the charge, union agents harassed and threatened nonmember workers who continue working to support their families. In the charge, the worker alleges that his personal property was damaged soon after the threats.
Two Chicago Police Department “Victim of Information Notices” reflect reports of property damage, one incident “by fire.”
A video posted on Youtube.com purports to show security camera footage of a South Water Market work truck on fire while someone on the sidewalk watches. The video also shows a fire truck responding to the scene and the purported damage to the truck after the fire was extinguished. Moreover, the video shows striking Teamster union militants asking each other “are we gonna kill ’em or what?” and stating that they are going to “test the guys out today” while posing like boxers.
“Teamster union toughs are apparently trying to intimidate workers who had the courage not to toe the union line and instead provide for their families,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Workers should never be subjected to violence or threats of violence under any circumstance.”
The worker filed the charge against the Teamster Local 703 union, seeking compensatory damages. He filed the charge for himself and other similarly-situated workers.
Minnesota Childcare Providers File Federal Lawsuit Challenging Forced Unionization Scheme
Minnesota Childcare Providers File Federal Lawsuit Challenging Forced Unionization Scheme
Childcare providers fight dictate to push childcare business owners into union forced dues ranks
Minneapolis, MN (June 5, 2013) – A group of Minnesota home-based childcare providers have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new law that seeks to forcibly unionize the state’s home-based childcare providers.
Jennifer Parrish from Rochester and 11 other providers from around the state filed the suit Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
Parrish and other providers seek to halt implementation of a recently-passed law intended to designate Service Employees International Union (SEIU) or American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) officials as the monopoly political representative of thousands of providers in the state, who are either business owners or family members who take care of children within their families.
Minnesota Childcare Providers File Federal Lawsuit Challenging Forced Unionization Scheme
Minneapolis, MN (June 5, 2013) – A group of Minnesota home-based childcare providers have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new law that seeks to forcibly unionize the state’s home-based childcare providers.
Jennifer Parrish from Rochester and 11 other providers from around the state filed the suit Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
Parrish and other providers seek to halt implementation of a recently-passed law intended to designate Service Employees International Union (SEIU) or American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) officials as the monopoly political representative of thousands of providers in the state, who are either business owners or family members who take care of children within their families.
Home-based childcare and personal care providers have challenged similar forced-unionization-by-government-fiat schemes in several states across the country, including Michigan and Illinois. The Illinois case is pending at the U.S. Supreme Court. Michigan ended its scheme after Foundation attorneys filed suit for providers there.
Foundation attorneys argue that such schemes violate the providers’ First Amendment right to choose with whom they associate to petition the government. The government does not have the power to force citizens to accept its handpicked political representation to lobby itself. Under the Minnesota scheme, after the union is installed it will then be empowered to confiscate dues from childcare providers for this forced “exclusive representation.
“Citizens have the power to select their political representation in government, not the other way around,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “This scheme, which forces small business owners, and even grandma taking care of her grandchildren, into union political association is a slap in the face of fundamental American principles we hold dear.”
“This union boss power grab scheme is nothing more than pure political payback and was popularized by disgraced Governors Gray Davis of California and Rod Blagojevich of Illinois.”
Many of the 12 providers previously challenged in federal court Governor Mark Dayton’s executive order that also sought to force the state’s homecare providers into union ranks. That suit was rendered moot after a state court struck down Dayton’s executive order as outside his authority under state law.
Updated Analysis: Right to Work States Still Enjoying Faster Growth, Residents Have Higher Purchasing Power
Tthe National Institute for Labor Relations Research has updated its fact sheet comparing various statistics in Right to Work states and forced-unionism states, and Right to Work states continue to enjoy more growth and purchasing power for citizens than their forced-unionism counterparts.
Over the past ten years, private sector employment opportunities in Right to Work states have grown by 6.4%, compared to just 0.4% job growth in states that allow forced unionism. Other economic indicators – from purchasing power to employee compensation – are equally stark. No matter how you slice the numbers, Right to Work states simply perform better than their forced-unionism neighbors.
The case for Right to Work laws has always rested on the importance of employee freedom, but it’s nice to know that protecting worker rights has other, more tangible benefits. Over the past several years, studies, surveys, and job reports have all confirmed that freedom in the workplace yields impressive economic results.
Click here for the full NILRR fact sheet.
Appeals Court Upholds Tenneco Workers’ Decision to Eject Unwanted Union
Washington, DC (June 3, 2013) – After a seven year legal struggle, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has finally upheld Tenneco workers’ decision to eject the United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 660 union. UAW lawyers had held up the decertification process by claiming that unfair labor practices perpetrated by Tenneco caused employee disaffection with the union, but the Court of Appeals concluded that there was “no substantial evidence” to back up this claim.
Lonnie Tremain, the Tenneco employee who first circulated a petition to decertify the union, received free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys during the legal battle to remove the UAW, including legal representation at the U. S. Court of Appeals.
In December 2006, 24 of the 31 employees at Tenneco’s Grass Lake, Michigan facility presented company officials with a decertification petition seeking the removal of UAW Local 660. Union lawyers responded by filing a series of unfair labor practice charges against Tenneco, claiming that the company’s treatment of the union had caused employees to turn against the UAW.
Among other things, UAW lawyers claimed that Tenneco’s refusal to turn over the home addresses and personal contact information of non-striking workers violated the National Labor Relations Act. Company officials say they were concerned about the possibility of union intimidation and violence.
Although an administrative law judge ruled that the decertification petition was valid and untainted by any Tenneco actions, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) determined in 2011 that the company’s unfair labor practices contributed to employees’ anti-union sentiment. After Tenneco appealed, the DC Court of Appeals overturned the NLRB’s ruling on the grounds that there was no evidence that the company did anything to influence its employees’ decision to get rid of the UAW.
Once a union is established as the monopoly bargaining agent for a workplace, it is very difficult to remove. Union officials can dictate terms and conditions of employment for all workers, even those who are not union members. In states without Right to Work laws, nonunion employees can also be forced to pay union dues.
“After a long legal battle, Tenneco employees have finally ejected the UAW,” said Patrick Semmens, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Employees who wish rid to themselves of a union shouldn’t be punished for their employer’s alleged transgressions or because of trumped up charges from union bosses attempting to stop a union decertification. Unfortunately, the Obama NLRB is more concerned with furthering Big Labor’s interests than respecting employees’ wishes.”
West Virginia Utility Worker Wins $10,000 Settlements from Penn Line Service, Local Laborer Union
West Virginia Utility Worker Wins $10,000 Settlements from Penn Line Service, Local Laborer Union
Worker discharged from job for not contributing to “voluntary” union PAC
Beckley, WV (May 31, 2013) – A former Penn Service Line, Inc. truck driver/laborer has won a substantial federal settlement from a Pennsylvania-based construction company and a West Virginia union after the company and union violated his rights and illegally seized union dues from his paychecks for the union’s political action committee (PAC).
Jeff Richmond of Meadow Bridge, WV, received free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
In July 2012, when Penn Line Service hired Richmond, company management told him that the job was a “union job.” Between July and October, the company confiscated, and the Laborers International Union of North America (LIUNA) Local 453 accepted, full union dues from Richmond’s paychecks even though he had not joined the union or consented to union dues payments.
In October 2012, company management gave Richmond and his coworkers a union membership and dues deductions authorization form. The form included a section for the employees to authorize “voluntary” contributions to three LIUNA-affiliated political action committees. Richmond signed up for union membership because he thought it was required for him to keep his job. Richmond did not, however, authorize the “voluntary” PAC contributions. Shortly thereafter, Richmond was discharged from his job for refusing to sign up for the union PAC contributions.
West Virginia Utility Worker Wins $10,000 Settlements from Penn Line Service, Local Laborer Union
Beckley, WV (May 31, 2013) – A former Penn Service Line, Inc. truck driver/laborer has won a substantial federal settlement from a Pennsylvania-based construction company and a West Virginia union after the company and union violated his rights and illegally seized union dues from his paychecks for the union’s political action committee (PAC).
Jeff Richmond of Meadow Bridge, WV, received free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
In July 2012, when Penn Line Service hired Richmond, company management told him that the job was a “union job.” Between July and October, the company confiscated, and the Laborers International Union of North America (LIUNA) Local 453 accepted, full union dues from Richmond’s paychecks even though he had not joined the union or consented to union dues payments.
In October 2012, company management gave Richmond and his coworkers a union membership and dues deductions authorization form. The form included a section for the employees to authorize “voluntary” contributions to three LIUNA-affiliated political action committees. Richmond signed up for union membership because he thought it was required for him to keep his job. Richmond did not, however, authorize the “voluntary” PAC contributions. Shortly thereafter, Richmond was discharged from his job for refusing to sign up for the union PAC contributions.
Under federal law, no worker can be forced to join a union. However, because West Virginia does not have a Right to Work law, workers who refrain from union membership can be forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Foundation-won Communications Workers v. Beck case that nonmembers may not be forced to pay for union activities unrelated to workplace bargaining, such as union political activities and members-only events.
After Richmond filed the charges, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a formal complaint against the union and the company. The company and the union settled the case to avoid further prosecution. Under the terms of the settlement, Richmond will receive over $10,000 in back pay, other expenses, and refunded union dues and fees that were illegally taken from his paychecks.
As a result of Richmond’s charges and the resulting investigation, an additional Penn Line Service worker will also receive over $600 in refunded union dues and fees illegally taken from his paychecks.
“Bulldozing someone into contributing to a union PAC that violates their sincerely-held beliefs is unconscionable,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work. “No worker should ever be forced to pay union dues or fees for a cause in which they disagree. That is why West Virginia needs to pass a Right to Work law making union membership and dues payments completely voluntary.”
Right to Work President Blasts Re-nomination of Lafe Solomon to the NLRB
Washington, DC (May 24, 2012) – Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation, released the following statement on the re-nomination of Lafe Solomon to the NLRB:
“Re-nominating Lafe Solomon, the NLRB lawyer who persecuted Boeing and South Carolina employees for having jobs in a Right to Work state, is slap in the face for independent workers and job providers. It’s telling that Obama waited to announce this on Friday before a holiday weekend as Congress is leaving town. He knows it’s not a popular move and is hoping that this latest sop to Big Labor will go unnoticed.”
For more information on the Boeing case and the National Right to Work Foundation’s involvement, click here.
