Wall Street Journal: Craig Becker’s “Recusal Refusal”
The Wall Street Journal slammed Obama recess appointee Craig Becker this week for participating in cases before the National Labor Relations Board involving his former employer, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU):
In his few months at the NLRB, Mr. Becker, former associate general counsel for the Service Employees International Union, has refused to recuse himself from most cases involving his former employer. This despite the fact that Mr. Becker signed the Obama Administration’s vaunted ethics pledge, in which he promised to refrain for two years from participating in "any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer."
In true lawyerly fashion, Mr. Becker is now running for the loopholes, arguing that the SEIU proper is a "distinct legal entity" that is different from local SEIU unions. Having liberated himself from that legal barrier, Mr. Becker says he intends to continue judging disputes that feature local SEIU shops. He even convinced the NLRB’s inspector general—who was asked to investigate one of the failure-to-recuse cases—to buy the separate legal entity line.
From a technical legal standpoint, SEIU locals may well be distinct from Mr. Becker’s former employer. Yet the clear intention of President Obama’s ethics pledge was to eliminate obvious political conflicts of interest. The example of a former SEIU lawyer like Mr. Becker sitting in judgment on cases featuring SEIU locals is Conflict 101.
No one understands better than Mr. Becker the deep organizational and financial ties between the SEIU and its locals, having been the attorney who crafted national legal strategies for use by SEIU locals everywhere. NLRB Chairwoman Wilma Liebman (another Obama appointee) has applied a more rigorous and appropriate standard of recusal for herself in cases involving her former employer, the Teamsters.
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which is representing workers in several cases involving SEIU locals, sent a letter Monday requesting that the Department of Justice investigate whether Mr. Becker has violated his pledge. Let’s hope Attorney General Eric Holder isn’t as cavalier about that request as President Obama was with Mr. Becker’s appointment.
Read more about the Foundation’s letter to Attorney General Holder.
Kansas City Nurse Challenges Backroom Union Deal to Silence Employees Who Oppose Unionization
Kansas City Nurse Challenges Backroom Union Deal to Silence Employees Who Oppose Unionization
Research Medical Center nurse files federal unfair labor practice charges against secret “neutrality agreement” that gives union organizers preferential treatment
Kansas City, MO (August 12, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Kansas City nurse has filed unfair labor practice charges against two unions and her employer for signing a “neutrality agreement” that gives union organizers preferential access to Research Medical Center.
Mary Hill and many other nurses oppose unionization at Research Medical Center. Despite these reservations, HCA, Inc., Research Medical Center’s parent company, agreed to help organizers from two collaborating unions impose monopoly bargaining on Hill and her colleagues.
Hill states that, facing pressure from Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and California Nurses Association (CNA) union organizers, the company signed a secret “neutrality agreement” with officials from both unions.
Kansas City Nurse Challenges Backroom Union Deal to Silence Employees Who Oppose Unionization
Kansas City, MO (August 12, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Kansas City nurse has filed unfair labor practice charges against two unions and her employer for signing a “neutrality agreement” that gives union organizers preferential access to Research Medical Center.
Mary Hill and many other nurses oppose unionization at Research Medical Center. Despite these reservations, HCA, Inc., Research Medical Center’s parent company, agreed to help organizers from two collaborating unions impose monopoly bargaining on Hill and her colleagues.
Hill states that, facing pressure from Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and California Nurses Association (CNA) union organizers, the company signed a secret “neutrality agreement” with officials from both unions.
Although the exact terms of this secret pact are unknown, HCA has given CNA and SEIU organizers wide-ranging access to employee break rooms, lounges, and other company facilities. On the other hand, HCA is refusing to grant employees who oppose unionization equal access to its facilities, and has gagged supervisors from discussing unionization with concerned employees.
Although it appears the “skids have been greased” for union officials to gain monopoly bargaining control of employees at Research Medical Center, employees who oppose unionization are thus left at a disadvantage. CNA union officials are already facing charges for using similar tactics during union organizing drives at Philadelphia and Houston hospitals.
Hill’s complaint will now be investigated by the National Labor Relations Board.
“Caught between union bosses and corporate executives who sell out employees to gain what will likely be very short term union boss favors, Kansas City employees have been stripped of their rights to organize against forced unionism in their workplace,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Medical professionals shouldn’t be subjected to backroom deals that give union operatives preferential treatment at the expense of employees’ workplace rights.”
Boeing Employees Respond to Union Boss Bullying with Unfair Labor Practice Charges
Boeing Employees Respond to Union Boss Bullying with Unfair Labor Practice Charges
UAW union bosses seek to punish workers who refused to abandon jobs during a union-instigated strike
Los Angeles, CA (August 9, 2010) – Three employees at the Carson Boeing plant have filed federal charges against the United Auto Worker (UAW) union in response to local union officials’ efforts to illegally punish them for exercising their rights to resign from formal union membership.
Before working during a UAW Local 148-instigated strike, the three employees exercised their right, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Pattern Makers v. NLRB (1985), to resign from formal, full dues-paying union membership.
The UAW Local 148 union hierarchy began internal union disciplinary procedures against the nonmember employees for refusing to abandon their jobs despite receiving their resignation letters before the union boss-ordered strike. Union officials have no legal power to punish nonmember employees for honoring their commitments to their employer as long as they first resigned their union membership.
Foundation attorneys have represented independent-minded employees across the country who suffered from union boss retaliation for refusing to abandon their jobs during union boss-ordered strikes. In some cases, nonmember employees have experienced sham disciplinary proceedings and even confiscatory fines to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.
Worker Advocate Asks Attorney General Holder to Investigate Apparent Violations of Obama Ethics Pledge by Labor Board Member
Worker Advocate Asks Attorney General Holder to Investigate Apparent Violations of Obama Ethics Pledge by Labor Board Member
Craig Becker, Obama’s recess NLRB appointee, has rejected requests to recuse himself from pending cases involving his former employer
Washington, DC (August 9, 2010) – The National Right to Work Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal aid to employees, today asked United States Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct an investigation into National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recess appointee Craig Becker’s participation in cases involving his former employer, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
Earlier this summer, Right to Work attorneys filed more than a dozen recusal motions against Becker, who served as associate general counsel for the SEIU and AFL-CIO before he was appointed to the NLRB during a Congressional recess. As the SEIU’s in-house lawyer, Becker litigated against Right to Work Foundation clients and developed legal strategies for SEIU local affiliates across the country. His published writings also indicate a strong level of hostility to the Foundation’s employee-oriented legal aid program.
Foundation attorneys asked Becker to step aside from any case involving Foundation-assisted workers, the SEIU, or its subordinate affiliates. Despite these apparent conflicts of interest, Becker has refused to recuse himself in every case but one.
Only the Attorney General or his appropriate designee has the authority under the Executive Order to investigate any violations of the Obama Administration ethics pledge, which Becker signed. The pledge explicitly forbids any appointee from involving themselves with a former employer for no less than two years.
Boeing Employees Respond to Union Boss Bullying with Unfair Labor Practice Charges
Los Angeles, CA (August 9, 2010) – Three employees at the Carson Boeing plant have filed federal charges against the United Auto Worker (UAW) union in response to local union officials’ efforts to illegally punish them for exercising their rights to resign from formal union membership.
Before working during a UAW Local 148-instigated strike, the three employees exercised their right, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Pattern Makers v. NLRB (1985), to resign from formal, full dues-paying union membership.
The UAW Local 148 union hierarchy began internal union disciplinary procedures against the nonmember employees for refusing to abandon their jobs despite receiving their resignation letters before the union boss-ordered strike. Union officials have no legal power to punish nonmember employees for honoring their commitments to their employer as long as they first resigned their union membership.
Foundation attorneys have represented independent-minded employees across the country who suffered from union boss retaliation for refusing to abandon their jobs during union boss-ordered strikes. In some cases, nonmember employees have experienced sham disciplinary proceedings and even confiscatory fines to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.
“In these tough economic times, it is unconscionable for UAW union bosses to retaliate against nonmember workers for providing for their families,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Boeing employees who exercise their long-recognized right to resign from union membership at any time should be allowed to make a living without the fear of harassment and intimidation for not toeing the union boss line.”
The NLRB regional office will now investigate the charges and decide whether to issue a formal complaint and prosecute the union.
Worker Advocate Asks Attorney General Holder to Investigate Apparent Violations of Obama Ethics Pledge by Labor Board Member
Washington, DC (August 9, 2010) – The National Right to Work Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal aid to employees, today asked United States Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct an investigation into National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recess appointee Craig Becker’s participation in cases involving his former employer, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
Earlier this summer, Right to Work attorneys filed more than a dozen recusal motions against Becker, who served as associate general counsel for the SEIU and AFL-CIO before he was appointed to the NLRB during a Congressional recess. As the SEIU’s in-house lawyer, Becker litigated against Right to Work Foundation clients and developed legal strategies for SEIU local affiliates across the country. His published writings also indicate a strong level of hostility to the Foundation’s employee-oriented legal aid program.
Foundation attorneys asked Becker to step aside from any case involving Foundation-assisted workers, the SEIU, or its subordinate affiliates. Despite these apparent conflicts of interest, Becker has refused to recuse himself in every case but one.
Only the Attorney General or his appropriate designee has the authority under the Executive Order to investigate any violations of the Obama Administration ethics pledge, which Becker signed. The pledge explicitly forbids any appointee from involving themselves with a former employer for no less than two years.
Becker argues that he may participate in cases involving SEIU affiliates because the national and local unions are “separate and distinct legal entit[ies].” The SEIU’s own constitution, however, considers local affiliates “constituent subordinate bodies” of the national union. Moreover, in 2009 over 85 percent of the SEIU’s receipts came from a per capita tax on the locals’ membership dues and fees. The national union even has the power to assume control over its locals if they do not conform to International policies.
The Foundation’s letter to Holder also notes Becker’s close involvement in the SEIU’s national legal strategy for corralling healthcare workers into unions. Wade Rathke, a former SEIU local union boss and founder of ACORN, praised Becker’s work in this field. As Rathke explained, Becker’s “role was often behind the scenes devising the strategy with the organizers and lawyers, writing the briefs for others to file, and putting all of the pieces together.” Becker’s “separate legal entity” analysis fails to account for this kind of relationship that actually exists between the SEIU and its local affiliates.
“If Craig Becker’s shaky analysis stands, the Obama Administration’s much-touted ethics pledge clearly is not worth the paper it is printed on,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Independent-minded workers who dare to challenge the SEIU’s coercive practices deserve a fair hearing, but how can they get that from the very same union’s former top lawyer?”
Legal Foundation Offers Free Assistance to DC Nurses Who Won’t Abandon Patients during Strike
Washington, DC (August 6, 2010) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable organization that assists employees nationwide, has announced an offer of free legal assistance to any Washington, DC nurses who do not wish to participate in an impending union-instigated strike at the Washington Hospital Center.
On August 3, Nurses United of the National Capital Area union officials declared a strike against the Washington Hospital Center. Although the date of the strike has yet to be determined, media reports indicate that a majority of eligible nurses either voted against the strike or didn’t vote at all. However, union officials seem intent on striking, which will take place as contract negotiations with the hospital continue to stall.
Ray LaJeunesse, Vice President and Legal Director of the National Right to Work Foundation, responded to the union’s strike threat by issuing the following statement on the nurses’ legal rights:
“Many DC nurses may wish to work during the strike to ensure their patients receive medical attention. Nurses who want to continue working must be made aware of their workplace rights, including the right to resign from union membership and the right to refrain from participating in a union-instigated strike. A detailed description of every nurse’s legal rights is available on the Foundation’s website at https://www.nrtw.org/a/a_7_p.htm.
“Foundation attorneys are prepared to advise nurses about their workplace rights. We are also prepared to provide free legal assistance to any nurses who are subjected to union harassment or retaliation for working during this or any subsequent strike initiated by union officials. You can call the Foundation toll free at 800-336-3600 or request free legal assistance via email at [email protected].
“The National Right to Work Foundation is committed to helping nurses who wish to continue working rather than participate in a union-instigated strike,” continued LaJeunesse. “Nurses must assert their legal rights to ensure they aren’t subjected to draconian internal union discipline for choosing to remain on the job, and Foundation staff attorneys stand ready to assist them.”
Under Supreme Court precedent and federal law:
- Workers have the right to resign from union membership at any time.
- Workers have the right to go to work even if the union is on strike. If a worker chooses to work during a strike, he or she must first resign from union membership to avoid union disciplinary action such as fines.
- After a union’s monopoly bargaining agreement with their employer expires, workers have the right to sign a decertification petition for a secret ballot election to eject union officials from their workplace.
Right to Work Attorneys Help Minneapolis Nurses Fight Back Against Union Intimidation
Faced with a looming strike on June 10, 2010, several Minneapolis nurses refused to follow union boss marching orders and instead stayed on the job to care for their patients. Although they resigned their membership before the strike took place, three nurses were threatened with union disciplinary hearings for refusing to walk off the job. With the help of Right to Work attorneys, these nurses have now filed unfair labor practice charges to hold union officials accountable for their heavy-handed intimidation tactics. Here’s a video report on the incident from a local Minneapolis station:
For related coverage, check out articles from Minnesota Public Radio and The Minnesota Star-Tribune. You can also read the Foundation’s press release on the incident here.
The Right to Work Foundation has also extended an offer of free legal aid to any nurses facing similar union "disciplinary hearings." Interested parties should use the contact information provided here to determine if they’re eligible for assistance.
UPDATE: On Monday, August 2, Foundation attorneys filed another round of charges against the MNA union on behalf of Susan Clark, a nurse who was never informed of her right to leave the union to avoid participating in the recent Minneapolis hospital strike. A copy of Clark’s charges can be found here (.pdf).
UAW Kingpins Hypocrisy: “Free Speech” Only to Force Workers into Union Ranks
Manny Lopez from the Detroit News comments on the United Autoworker (UAW) union hierarchy’s "new" strategy of organizing workers, (i.e. using even more intimidation and harassment to force additional workers into their dues-paying ranks):
Bob King, the new president of the UAW was stumping for democracy yesterday, and you’d think that it would be hard to corrupt such a thing.
But he did. See, democracy to the unions means do it our way, or no way.
King said the UAW will try a new tactic to organize foreign automakers. The membership-declining union is going to draft a set of principles that will bar companies from using derogatory, untruthful or threatening statements to dissuade workers from organizing (as if that was a one-way street).
"Any company that does not agree to the UAW principles is essentially declaring war on freedom of speech and assembly," he said.
Ta-da, the "shame campaign" (my interpretation, not his).
Those that don’t sign on will be labeled as being against the First Amendment.
But as Lopez correctly points out, UAW union hypocrites seem the least bit interested in protecting Michigan workers’ rights to also not be forced to associate with something they want no part of:
In fact, the UAW’s push for freedom could be a good thing if it were universally open to such a thing. How about the UAW abide by its own new interest in openness and allow its members in Michigan and other forced unionism states to also have the freedom to decide whether they want to be in the union?
I’ll buy into the UAW’s campaign for the First Amendment and the freedom of speech and assembly when it gives its workers in every state that same opportunity.
How about it Mr. King? Let’s make Michigan a right-to-work state. Or is the freedom to choose limited to certain circumstances?
And not only would Right to Work protections be great for workers’ rights, it would also be good for their wallets. Now that’s a "new" strategy Michigan’s families could support.
