NOTE: This article is from the most recent issue of Foundation Action, our bi-monthly newsletter. You can sign up to receive a print edition of the newsletter here.

Pennsylvania Construction Worker Digs Up Illegal Union PAC Scheme

Worker loses his job because he didn’t contribute to "voluntary" union political fund

SCOTTDALE,?PA?– A Pennsylvania-based construction company and a local union are facing federal charges for violating the rights of a former truck driver/laborer.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Jeff Richmond of Meadow Bridge, West Virginia, filed federal unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Cincinnati against Penn Line Service, Inc. and Laborers International Union of North America (LIUNA) Local 453.

Told union membership and political contributions were required

In July 2012, when Penn Line Service hired Richmond, company management informed him that the job was a “union job.”  Between July and October, the company confiscated, and the LIUNA union hierarchy accepted, full union dues from Richmond’s paychecks even though he had not joined the union nor given authorization for the company to take full union dues from his paychecks. 

In October, Penn Line Service 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 LIUNA’s political action committee (PAC), the Laborers’ Political League, and the West Virginia Laborer’s District Council PAC.  

Richmond signed up for union membership and dues payments because he was given the impression that union membership was required for him to keep his job.  Richmond did not, however, authorize the “voluntary” PAC contributions.  Shortly after, Richmond’s supervisor informed him that the union form was being returned for Richmond to fill out completely.  The next day, Richmond notified his supervisor he would not sign up for the PAC contributions for moral reasons.

After making a phone call, the supervisor gave Richmond an ultimatum:  fill out the form or the supervisor would take him home.  Standing by his convictions, Richmond went home.  

“Management took me home because I told them I wouldn’t sign the voluntary check off authorization for the [union’s PACs] for moral reasons,” Richmond said.  “I didn’t feel that it was right for them to terminate someone because they wouldn’t sign a ‘voluntary’ check off.”

Federal law provides some recourse; more needed

Under federal law, no worker can be forced to formally join a union.  Unfortunately, West Virginia does not have a Right to Work law, which means that workers who refrain from union membership can be forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Foundation-won Communications Workers v. Beck case that nonmembers have the right to opt out of paying for union activities unrelated to workplace bargaining, such as union boss politics, ideological causes, and members-only events.  

Richmond’s charges allege that company and union officials violated his rights by telling him that the union PAC contributions were a condition of employment and terminating him from his job when he refused to pay up.  The charge also alleges that company and union officials violated federal law when they failed to inform Richmond of his rights to refrain from union membership and full union dues before confiscating full union dues from his paychecks.

“Bulldozing someone into contributing to a PAC that violates their sincerely-held beliefs is downright unconscionable and also a clear violation of federal law,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation.  “Company and union officials often collude to mislead workers into believing that full union dues payments, and in this case so-called ‘voluntary’ union PAC contributions, are a condition of employment while leaving workers unaware of their rights.”

“No worker should ever be forced to pay union dues or fees for a cause with which they disagree,” added Mix.  “That is why West Virginia desperately needs to pass a Right to Work law making union membership and dues payments completely voluntary.”

Recently the United States Supreme Court rejected an appeal by Teamster union lawyers of a National Right to Work Foundation-won ruling against a local Teamster policy that discriminated against non union workers. Last year, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals slapped Teamster Local 523 with sanctions for filing a frivolous appeal in the case.

For more on the case and other developments in the Foundation’s free legal aid program, watch the video below.

The National Right to Work Foundation relies on voluntary contributions form its supporters to provide free legal aid. To make a tax-deductible contribution, please click here.

NOTE: This article is from the last issue of Foundation Action, our bi-monthly newsletter. You can sign up to receive a print edition of the newsletter here.

as Michigan Governor Rick Snyder signed private sector and public sector Right to Work legislation into law, union officials and others had already announced their plans to file frivolous lawsuits designed to delay implementation of and hamstring the legislation in court.

Responding to these tactics, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation immediately announced the creation of a special task force to defend Michigan?s newly-enacted Right to Work law.

?"Michigan?’s new Right to Work laws are a great advance for worker freedom, but union bosses won?t give up their special privileges without a fight,"? said Ray LaJeunesse, Vice President and Legal Director of the National Right to Work Foundation. "?Big Labor is already planning a vicious legal counterattack in state and federal court, which is why we need to be ready.?"

Just as Foundation Action went to press, to preempt union lawyers from getting an injunction from a friendly state court judge, Governor Snyder asked Michigan?s Supreme Court to render an advisory opinion on the constitutionality of the state?s new Right to Work laws. Foundation attorneys are preparing to file an amicus brief in that case for Michigan workers supporting the laws? constitutionality.

Foundation attorneys ready to defend?Right to Work

Fortunately for Michigan workers, Foundation attorneys have successfully defended several state Right to Work laws in the past.

Shortly after Indiana became the nation?s 23rd Right to Work state, United Steel Worker (USW) union bosses filed a lawsuit challenging the bill?s legality in state court.

Right to Work attorneys quickly responded by filing a brief opposing the union?s lawsuit for two workers who are employed at facilities unionized by USW operatives and are forced to pay union dues just to keep their jobs. Foundation attorneys attended oral argument on a motion to dismiss on October 16 and sent local counsel to a hearing in late January.

Cases highlight success of Foundation legal program

Moreover, Foundation attorneys defended Wisconsin?s recently-enacted public sector union reforms (including Right to Work protections for most Wisconsin public employees) in a federal appeals court (see page 3 of this issue of Foundation Action) for three Wisconsin civil servants. Foundation attorneys are also assisting three other Wisconsin public employees defending the reforms in two other cases, one pending in federal court, and another at the state?s appeals court.

Recent public polling reveals that a majority of Michiganders support the new Right to Work laws. Despite losing in the court of public opinion, Michigan union bosses are undeterred. Big Labor is predictably turning to the court system to delay or even roll back the state?s popular Right to Work laws in an effort to reclaim their force-dues powers.

"?Despite union lawyers?’ attempts to strike down Right to Work laws wherever they are passed, their track record against our experienced Right to Work staff attorneys is far from stellar,?" explained LaJeunesse. ?"But union bosses know all it takes is one friendly judge to temporarily block any restraint on their special government-granted power to compel workers to pay dues as a condition of employment."
?

"?That is why Foundation attorneys are are already preparing to defend Michigan?s new Right to Work laws from any frivolous union boss legal challenges,"? added LaJeunesse. ?"Thanks to Foundation cases expanding worker freedom in state and federal court — including numerous Supreme Court wins — we?re confident of victory.?"

NOTE: This article is from the upcoming issue of Foundation Action, our bi-monthly newsletter. You can sign up to receive a print edition of the newsletter here.

Indiana and Wisconsin Right to Work Protections Upheld in Federal Court

Foundation attorneys help thwart bogus union legal challenges to recent labor reforms  

SPRINGFIELD, VA?- In the span of two days, Foundation attorneys scored resounding victories defending Indiana’s newly-enacted Right to Work law and Wisconsin’s 2010 public sector Right to Work law in two federal courts.

The legal victories both highlight the need and the success of the Foundation’s litigation program.

Indiana union bosses soundly defeated in court

A United States District Court Judge dismissed a federal lawsuit challenging Indiana’s Right to Work law filed by International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 150 lawyers. IUOE Local 150, headquartered in suburban Chicago, filed the lawsuit to undo what thousands of Hoosier citizens worked hard to achieve through the legislative process immediately after the law was enacted last February.

Unfortunately for the IUOE, the constitutionality of state Right to Work laws has long been a settled question. And National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, representing four Indiana workers who support the Right to Work law, advised lawyers for the State of Indiana about arguments that were made to defend the law in court.

The four Hoosier citizens who opposed the union’s legal challenge were David Bercot, a certified wastewater operator for the ITR Concession Company in Fort Wayne; Joel Tibbetts, a Minteq International assistant manager in Valparaiso; Douglas Richards, an employee with the Goshen-based Cequent Towing Products; and Larry Getts, a Dana Holding Corporation technician in Albion.

Judge Philip Simon dismissed all of the union lawyers’ claims. He did not rule on arguments contesting the law on the grounds that it violates Indiana’s constitution, leaving that to state courts to decide. A United Steel Workers legal challenge based on state laws is still proceeding in Indiana state court, where two other Foundation-assisted employees have filed a brief arguing that the law is consistent with their state’s constitution.

“We’re happy to report that the judge rejected IUOE union bosses’ frivolous arguments and ensured that millions of Indianans will continue to work free from union coercion,” said Patrick?Semmens, Vice President of National Right to Work.

Wisconsin public sector Right to Work law stands

A day after the Indiana victory, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit based in Chicago upheld all of Governor Scott Walker’s public sector unionism reform measures, also known as “Act 10.”

The court rejected union lawyers’ attempts to strike down the law’s annual union recertification requirements, ban on the use of taxpayer funded-payroll systems to collect union dues, new limits on the scope of what union officials can demand in contract negotiations, and a provision that granted most of Wisconsin’s public employees Right to Work protections.

With free legal assistance from Foundation and Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty attorneys, three Wisconsin public employees moved to intervene in the lawsuit in favor of the law after lawyers from seven unions, led by the Wisconsin Education Association Council, challenged it in federal court.

The three civil servants — Kenosha teacher Kristi Lacroix, Waukesha high school teacher Nathan Berish, and trust fund specialist at the Wisconsin Department of Employee Trust Funds Ricardo Cruz — were permitted to file amicus briefs in the district court and their Foundation attorney was allowed to argue on the merits of the law before the appeals court during a hearing.

“The appellate court upheld all of ‘Act 10’ as constitutional by relying on principles established in Foundation-supported Supreme Court victories. Those cases hold that union bosses have no constitutional power to force workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. Unions also don’t have a constitutional right to use government resources to deduct union dues or fees from workers’ paychecks,” said Semmens.

“The court’s decision strikes a mighty blow for individual workers who do not want anything to do with an unwanted union in their workplace. The text of the decision makes it clear that legal arguments presented by Foundation staff attorneys were critical to the ruling.”