Right to Work Foundation Calls on NLRB Inspector General to Expand Investigation into Board Member’s Conflicts of Interest
Washington, DC (July 8, 2010) – The National Right to Work Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal aid to employees, has asked the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Inspector General to expand the scope of his announced investigation into Craig Becker, Obama’s recess appointee to the Board. Prompted by a letter from Rep. Darrell Issa (R, CA.) and other members of the House Oversight Committee, the Inspector General has indicated he will investigate Becker’s involvement in St. Barnabas v. SEIU Local 1957 for possible conflicts of interest.
Earlier this summer, Right to Work attorneys filed 13 recusal motions against Becker, who served as associate general counsel for the Service Employees International Union (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 attorneys and developed legal strategies for SEIU 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 or the SEIU and its subordinate affiliates. Despite these apparent conflicts of interest, Becker has rejected the recusal motions in all but one pending case.
In one notable instance, Becker refused to recuse himself from a pending case that would overturn the NLRB’s landmark Dana decision, which created a 45 day window period for employees to vote out union officials if they acquired their monopoly bargaining privileges through a card check organizing drive. Becker denies having pre-judged the case despite a career of advocating for card check union organizing and despite having filed a brief arguing against the Board’s decision.
The Foundation’s letter to the NLRB Inspector General also notes that the Obama Administration ethics pledge Becker signed explicitly forbids any appointee from involving themselves with a former employer for no less than two years. Despite this provision, Becker is poised to decide several cases involving SEIU affiliates.
“Craig Becker has repeatedly refused to recuse himself from cases involving his former employer,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “If the NLRB Inspector General is serious about investigating Becker’s clear conflicts of interest, he should examine all cases where Becker’s work as a leading SEIU lawyer raises serious ethical questions.”
Mark Mix in the Washington Examiner: When Big Labor plays with fire, taxpayers get burned
Earlier this week, Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, was published in the Washington Examiner warning about the threat the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill (pdf), which just passed the House last week, poses not only public safety workers’ rights, but also state and community budgets. As we noted before, public officials across the country are waking up to the fact that public sector forced unionism is behind the financial crises in their communities.
From Mark Mix’s commentary:
(I)n the 22 states which prohibit forced union dues for government employees and most of which don’t authorize public-sector union monopoly bargaining, fewer than 30 percent of public workers are unionized. Not one of these 22 states was to be found on last month’s Business Insider’s list of the states “most likely to default.”
Business Insider ranked heavily unionized California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New York, New Jersey, Ohio and Wisconsin as the worst default risks. And the Hirsch-Macpherson data shows that an average of 61 percent of public-sector employees in these nine states were under union monopoly bargaining — 20 percent higher than the typical state.
In these nine worst default-risk states from 1999 to 2009, aggregate private-sector jobs fell by 4.2 percent, but heavily unionized state and local government jobs increased by 9 percent. Since annual state and local government employee compensation costs nationwide come to $1.1 trillion, or half of all state and local government spending, it’s not hard to see that the Big Labor-driven growth in government payrolls is a fiscal catastrophe for states like California, Illinois, and New Jersey.
…
But government union bosses are expecting to have the last laugh if fed-up taxpayers and their allies limit themselves to going after just bloated public-sector payrolls and unsustainable public pension plans, rather than root of the problem itself.
Laws empowering government union officials to negotiate the contract terms for all front-line employees at a public agency, even for those employees who want nothing to do with the union, are behind the messes in Sacramento, Springfield and Trenton. And laws that authorize the firing of public servants for refusing to pay union dues or fees to an unwanted union make matters even worse.
Long-term solutions to state budget crises will require addressing the core problems of union monopoly bargaining and forced union dues in the public sector.
Until then, hopefully the Senate will spare police officers, firefighters, and EMTs from forced union “representation” that will make budget matters worse for the numerous states that have already rejected it.
Read the entire Washington Examiner guest commentary by Mark Mix here.
California Teachers Unwittingly Fund Union Political Activism
From the San Jose Mercury News, here’s an excellent op-ed from retired teacher Larry Sand on forced teacher union dues:
So why does CTA not let its members decide if they want to contribute to CTA’s various political funds? It is simply because the union knows that if these donations were voluntary, the vast majority of teachers wouldn’t contribute a penny.So does CTA really care about the needs and opinions of its teachers, or does it just see its members as convenient ATMs to further its own political agenda?
Teachers should closely examine whether they want to continue giving their hard-earned money to candidates and causes in which they have no interest or find repellent. And CTA needs to fess up to its arrogant attitude that it knows what’s best for teachers, when, in fact, what teachers actually think about various issues is of no concern to it.
As Sand notes, even if teachers opt-out of dues for union political activism, they’re still forced to pay over $700 annually in so-called "agency fees" to teacher union bosses. And even that’s no guarantee that their money won’t be used to fund union political activism – as many Foundation-assisted employees can attest, union officials often funnel forced dues collected for "workplace bargaining" to union-backed political causes.
The solution, of course, is for California to adopt a Right to Work law, which would make all union dues strictly voluntary. Right to Work laws ensure that union officials only accept voluntary contributions from all employees, including public school teachers.
Federal Labor Board Hits Nurses Union Hierarchy with Complaint for Keeping Workers in Dark
Federal Labor Board Hits Nurses Union
Hierarchy with Complaint for Keeping Workers in Dark
Warwick, RI (July 8, 2010) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Boston issued a formal complaint indicating that local union officials have kept nurses in the dark about the amount of compulsory union dues.
The NLRB’s regional director investigated unfair labor practices charges filed by a Kent Hospital nurse with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation. The regional director found merit to the charges that United Nurses & Allied Professionals (UNAP) union officials failed to meet federal financial disclosure requirements and will now prosecute the union before an administrative law judge.
In September 2009, Jeanette Geary and other nurses informed UNAP union officials that they were exercising their right to refrain from formal union membership and to the payment of any fees for non-bargaining activities including politics and member-only events.
Federal Labor Board Hits Nurses Union Hierarchy with Complaint for Keeping Workers in Dark
Warwick, RI (July 8, 2010) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Boston issued a formal complaint indicating that local union officials have kept nurses in the dark about the amount of compulsory union dues.
The NLRB’s regional director investigated unfair labor practices charges filed by a Kent Hospital nurse with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation. The regional director found merit to the charges that United Nurses & Allied Professionals (UNAP) union officials failed to meet federal financial disclosure requirements and will now prosecute the union before an administrative law judge.
In September 2009, Jeanette Geary and other nurses informed UNAP union officials that they were exercising their right to refrain from formal union membership and to the payment of any fees for non-bargaining activities including politics and member-only events.
Under the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck, employees can only be forced to pay union dues related to workplace bargaining as a condition of employment. Additionally, union officials are obligated to provide employees with an independently verified breakdown of union expenditures to determine how much objecting employees must pay.
UNAP union officials, however, have failed to provide Geary and other nonmember nurses with adequate disclosure as required by law. According to the complaint, union bosses have failed to provide any evidence of an independent audit “beyond a mere assertion.” Moreover, union officials have not provided any breakdown of expenditures from a “Defense Fund” despite claiming they include chargeable expenses.
“Unfortunately, union boss financial chicanery is all too common and many workers are kept in the dark about their rights,” explained Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “The Ocean State should enact a Right to Work law to protect the freedom of association of independent-minded workers.”
Right to Work Committee: Kagan Opposes First Amendment Right to Refrain from Supporting Union Boss Politics
As reported in today’s Washington Examiner, the National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix sent a letter to the U.S. Senate opposing Elena Kagan’s confirmation as a Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court for misrepresenting her views regarding the use of forced union dues for union boss political activity.
From the Examiner:
(Mark Mix argues) Kagan should not be confirmed because when she was asked by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-UT, about a 1996 email she wrote while serving in the Clinton administration, she falsely claimed she was merely repeating the chief executive’s views, not her own.
In his letter to the senators, Mix quoted Kagan’s email in which she said:
"It is unfortunately true that almost any meaningful campaign finance reform proposal raises constitutional issues. This is a result of the Supreme Court’s view – which I believe to be mistaken in many cases – that money is speech and that attempts to limit the influence of money on our political system therefore raises First Amendment problems."
Kagan could not have simply been echoing somebody else’s view in that email, Mix argued, because a memo later in 1996 from her and other White House staff members to then-White House chief of staff Leon Panetta "incorporated Ms. Kagan’s argument that the First Amendment does not protect the right to spend money for political activities. In short, in 1996 Ms. Kagan both suggested and endorsed that crabbed view of the First Amendment."
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has repeatedly fought to protect workers who are forced to pay union dues and fees as a condition of employment to also support union boss political activities with which they disagree before the U.S. Supreme Court and various other courts across the country.
Mark Mix’s letter also noted that Kagen expressed opposition to the Foundation’s Supreme Court victory in Communications Workers v. Beck in which the Court affirmed the right of private-sector workers to exercise the same freedom from coerced support of union boss politics under the National Labor Relations Act:
(Ms. Kagan) recommended that President Clinton oppose any legislation protecting the right of workers not to be forced to subsidize union politics, despite the First Amendment’s guarantee of that basic worker freedom of speech and association.
…
Ms. Kagan emailed… her recommendation that (the Administration)… “state strong opposition to Beck legislation, no matter what it is attached to.”
Ms. Kagan… disagreed with the well-established legal principle that underlies the long line of Supreme Court decisions recognizing the constitutional right of workers not to be compelled to subsidize union political activities as a condition of employment… (putting) her far outside the judicial mainstream and (demonstrating) a disdain for the rights of independent-minded American workers.
To read Mark Mix’s letter, click here.
National Labor Relations Board Inspector General to Investigate Board Member for Possible Conflicts of Interest
Washington, DC (July 1, 2010) – Prompted by a letter from Rep. Darrell Issa (R, CA.) and other members of the House Oversight Committee, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Inspector General has announced he will investigate NLRB recess appointee Craig Becker’s involvement in St. Barnabas v. SEIU Local 1957. The investigation bolsters several motions for recusal filed by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, who contend that Becker’s evident conflicts of interest should have disqualified him from ruling on their cases.
Right to Work attorneys filed 13 recusal motions against Becker, who served as associate general counsel for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the AFL-CIO before he was appointed to the Board during a Congressional recess. As the SEIU’s general counsel, Becker litigated against Right to Work Foundation attorneys and developed legal strategies for SEIU 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 or the SEIU and its state and local affiliates. Despite these apparent conflicts of interest, Becker has rejected the recusal motions in all but one case pending before the NLRB.
In one notable case, Becker refused to recuse himself from union lawyers’ attempt to overturn the NLRB’s landmark Dana decision, which created a 45 day window period for employees to vote out union officials if they acquired their monopoly bargaining privileges through a card check organizing drive. Becker denies having pre-judged the case despite a career of advocating for card check union organizing.
After Rep. Issa raised the issue in a recent letter, the NLRB’s Inspector General announced he will investigate Becker’s involvement in the pending St. Barnabas case. Becker claims that he has abided by all relevant provisions of the federal code and a signed ethics pledge he submitted to the Obama Administration. That pledge states he will not participate in any cases involving his former employer for two years following his appointment to the NLRB.
“We’ve provided free legal aid to thousands of workers who have clashed with the Service Employees International Union, Craig Becker’s former employer,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Becker’s evident conflicts of interest – not to mention his avowed hostility toward the Foundation’s legal aid program – should be reason enough for recusal in several NLRB cases.”
“That the Inspector General of this decidedly pro-forced unionism Administration is launching an inquiry demonstrates the extent of Becker’s ethical problems,” continued Mix. “Throughout his career, Becker has revealed himself as an avid supporter of Big Labor’s special privileges. The IG should expand the scope of the investigation to the numerous other cases in which Becker’s background as an SEIU lawyer makes him unable to judge objectively.”
Legal Foundation Offers Free Assistance to Nurses Who Won’t Abandon Their Patients during Looming Strike
Minneapolis, MN (July 1, 2010) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable organization that assists employees nationwide, is renewing its offer of free legal assistance to any Minneapolis nurses who do not wish to participate in another union-instigated strike.
The Minnesota Nurses Association (MNA) union has again decided to strike against 14 hospitals in the Twin Cities area on July 6. However, recent media reports suggest that many nurses do not wish to participate in the impending strike.
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:
“Many Minneapolis nurses may wish to work during the strike to ensure that 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 more detailed description of every nurse’s legal rights can be found on the Foundation’s website at https://www.nrtw.org/a/a_7_p.htm
“Foundation attorneys are prepared to advise Twin Cities 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 MNA 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.
Wasteful Union Boss Rules Provide Sneak Peak at the Police/Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill
Via Big Government, here’s a damning video explaining the wasteful contract created by New York/New Jersey Police Union officials, which mandates that officers collect overtime pay even after they’ve been suspended for misconduct:
Of course, the Police/Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill threatens to spread this and other wasteful union boss instituted work rules to states and counties who have no desire to hamstring their public safety employees with union monopoly bargaining. If Big Labor gets their way on Capitol Hill, this video is a frightening portent of things to come.
The Obama Administration’s Ethics Blind Spot for Big Labor
The Obama Administration hasn’t been shy about paying back the union bosses, but it has been shy about answering basic questions about its collusion with Big Labor.
So while Monday’s report in Politico shouldn’t shock anyone, it is telling:
President Barack Obama’s political director failed to disclose that he was slated to receive a nearly $40,000 payout from a large labor union while he was working in the White House.
Patrick Gaspard, who served as the political director for the Service Employees International Union local 1199, received $37,071.46 in “carried over leave and vacation” from the union in 2009, but he did not disclose the agreement to receive the payment on his financial disclosure forms filed with the White House.
…
Gaspard spent nine years at 1199 SEIU, a major labor union in New York. Gaspard also worked for Obama’s campaign, and later worked for the transition team, where he earned $11,500, according to the financial disclosure form he filed this year. He was pulling a salary from SEIU until Jan. 16, 2009, shortly before Obama was inaugurated.
From political director of an affiliate of the SEIU to political director of President Obama. Where did one job stop and the other begin?
