Connecticut State Trooper Wins $260,500 Settlement in Federal Lawsuit Against Police Union and Department Officials
Trooper was demoted after he abstained from funding union politics, CSPU union has now backed down and settled case
Hartford, CT (April 28, 2023) – Connecticut State Trooper Joseph Mercer has won a settlement in his federal civil rights lawsuit against the Connecticut State Police Union (CSPU) and Department of Emergency Services (DESPP) officials, in which he charged them with illegally demoting him for opposing union membership and politics. Mercer received free legal aid from staff attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Mercer’s suit began in 2016, when he accused the CSPU union, CSPU President Andrew Matthews, and DESPP Commissioner Dora Schriro of knocking him out of a prestigious Operations Sergeant position after he exercised his First Amendment rights to abstain from CSPU membership and not pay dues to support the union’s political activities. The department placed Mercer in a position that offered fewer overtime opportunities and involved less time in the field.
In August 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut denied motions to dismiss the case filed by CSPU and state officials, allowing the case to proceed. Pressure on defendants increased in May 2022, when the District Court ordered DESPP Commissioner James Rovella, who had replaced Schriro, to turn over additional discovery.
Now, CSPU and DEPP officials have backed down and settled the case. As part of the settlement, Mercer will receive more than two hundred thousand dollars from CSPU and DEPP.
Connecticut State Trooper Groundlessly Fired After Objecting to Union Politics
In May 2015, Sergeant Mercer was appointed Operations Sergeant of the Emergency Services Unit, a prestigious command position that entails significant responsibility for Emergency Services training and field operations. Although Sergeant Mercer had seventeen years of experience, in June 2015, CSPU President Matthews filed a grievance over Sergeant Mercer’s appointment.
Matthews’ grievance claimed that there had been no “selection process” to fill the position, despite the fact that none of Sergeant Mercer’s union-member predecessors had undergone any particular kind of selection process before they got the job.
Mathews filed a second baseless grievance, alleging Mercer had mismanaged an incident involving an armed suspect barricaded in a hotel. State police officials had never expressed dissatisfaction with how Mercer handled the situation.
In October 2015, after meeting in private with the union president, the then-Commissioner of the DESPP transferred Mercer out of his Operations Sergeant position to an administrative post. That new position gave Mercer substantially fewer opportunities to work in the field or to accrue overtime pay. Prior to this demotion, Mercer had received no warnings, reprimands, or other disciplinary actions regarding the incident referenced in Matthews’ grievance. Mercer filed his lawsuit with Foundation aid in February 2016.
Mercer’s Foundation-won settlement now requires CSPU and the State to pay $260,500.00.
Public Servants Have First Amendment Right to Stop Supporting Union Politicking
“We at the Foundation are proud to have defended Sergeant Mercer’s rights and secured him a settlement that vindicates his free association,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “However, it’s disgraceful that CSPU union officials targeted Mercer, a dedicated public safety officer, with such a vicious retribution scheme in the first place. Public servants should not have to endure multi-year lawsuits just so they can refrain from supporting union politics they oppose.”
“Situations like these demonstrate why the Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME decision, which the U.S. Supreme Court decided while Mercer’s case was ongoing, is so important,” Mix added. “As was obvious in Mercer’s case, unelected public sector union bosses often wield their enormous clout over government to serve the union’s private interests over the public interest. That’s why it’s vital that public employees can exercise their First Amendment Janus right to cut off all financial support of union bosses who are contorting government in this way.”
Northwest Ohio Employees File Suit to Knock Down Another Janus Restriction
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, March/April 2023 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Foundation-aided Ohio workers have already won string of victories over union-imposed ‘escape periods’
From left: Penny Wilson, Theresa Fannin, and Kozait Elkhatib aren’t taking AFSCME union officials’ onerous First Amendment restrictions sitting down. With free Foundation legal aid, they will continue the fight to protect Janus in Ohio.
TOLEDO, OH – American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union bosses seem to have a knack for violating Ohio public workers’ First Amendment right to refrain from paying union dues.
Fortunately, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys are even more adept at forcing Ohio AFSCME bosses to back down from their unconstitutional dues schemes, and have led Ohio government workers to victory in several such cases.
The latest case in this saga comes from three Lucas County Job and Family Services (JFS) employees, who in December filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the AFSCME Ohio Council 8 union and their employer for violating their constitutional rights.
Penny Wilson, Theresa Fannin, and Kozait Elkhatib’s lawsuit says AFSCME union officials illegally seized money from their paychecks in violation of their First Amendment rights as recognized in the landmark 2018 Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME U.S. Supreme Court decision. The Ohio public employees are receiving free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation and the Ohio-based Buckeye Institute.
Union Officials Kept Employees in the Dark About Janus Freedoms
In Janus, the Court declared it a First Amendment violation to force public sector workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. The Court also ruled that union officials can only deduct money from the paycheck of a public sector employee who has voluntarily waived his or her Janus rights.
“Plaintiffs . . . file this suit to stop Lucas County JFS and AFSCME from seizing union payments from them without their consent and to receive compensation for violations of their First Amendment rights,” reads the workers’ complaint.
Officials from AFSCME Council 8 and Lucas County JFS enforce a policy which permits the direct deduction of union dues from employees’ paychecks. According to the policy, employees who wish to stop subsidizing the union have only a few days per year in which to do so — an “escape period” that effectively forbids the exercise of their First Amendment Janus rights for more than 90 percent of the year.
AFSCME union officials never informed Wilson, Fannin, and Elkhatib of this restriction. Union officials also never told the women that they had a First Amendment right under Janus to abstain from dues deductions, or that union dues could only be taken from them if they waived that right.
The employees discovered their Janus rights and attempted to exercise those rights twice by sending letters to AFSCME union officials stating that they were ending their union memberships and terminating dues deductions. AFSCME union officials denied all three women’s requests, stating that union dues deductions would continue because the letters missed the narrow “escape period” imposed by the union.
Wilson, Fannin, and Elkhatib’s lawsuit seeks to stop Lucas County JFS and AFSCME union officials from seizing dues from their paychecks. It also seeks a refund of all union dues taken from their wages without their consent.
Foundation Janus Victories Continue to Stack Up in Ohio
Independent-minded Ohio public employees are on a winning streak against AFSCME officials’ “escape period” arrangements. Foundation attorneys scored a significant victory for Ohio public servants’ Janus rights in a 2020 lawsuit against another Ohio AFSCME local (Council 11). Rather than face off against Foundation attorneys, those AFSCME union officials backed down and settled the case. As a result, Foundation attorneys freed almost 30,000 Ohio public employees from a “maintenance of membership” scheme that limited the exercise of Janus rights to roughly once every three years.
In fact, Wilson, Fannin, and Elkhatib’s suit isn’t the first time that Foundation attorneys have faced off against AFSCME Council 8 officials. In 2019, Foundation attorneys brought a similar First Amendment suit for seven Ohio employees that brought down another restrictive “escape period” enforced by Council 8 chiefs.
AFSCME Council 8 Officials Caught Red-Handed Again Violating First Amendment
“Even after abandoning other ‘escape period’ schemes to avoid facing Foundation staff attorneys in court, shameless AFSCME union officials continue to violate the Janus rights of the very employees they claim to ‘represent,’” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens.
“America’s public workers should not have to file federal lawsuits to protect their money and their First Amendment rights from the predations of public sector union officials.”
Louisville Ford Assembly Plant Employee Wins Refund in Case Charging UAW Union Officials and Ford with Illegally Seizing Dues Money
Embattled UAW and Ford back down and settle case; numerous UAW officials currently serving sentences for embezzlement and corruption
Louisville, KY (April 26, 2023) – A Ford Louisville Assembly plant employee has just prevailed in her federal cases against the United Automobile Workers (UAW) Local 862 union and her employer. Shiphrah Green charged union officials in October 2022 with illegally seizing dues money from her paycheck and threatening her job after she exercised her right to refrain from union membership. Green filed a similar charge against Ford for its role in the scheme.
Green received free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys, who asserted her rights before National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 9 in Cincinnati. In addition to the illegal dues deductions and threats, Green’s October 2022 charges also detailed that UAW and Ford officials had forced her to navigate several unnecessary and unlawful steps to end her financial support for the union.
Foundation attorneys argued that the UAW union and Ford violated her rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which protects American private sector employees’ right to refrain from any or all union activities. Additionally, Kentucky is a Right to Work state, meaning that state law prohibits union officials and employers from requiring workers to join or pay union dues or fees to keep their jobs.
Now, pursuant to settlements, Green will be reimbursed for all the dues illegally seized from her paycheck. UAW and Ford must also post notices informing workers that they will no longer continue to take dues from employees’ paychecks after they have resigned from the union, or create unlawful roadblocks to terminating membership or stopping dues deductions.
UAW Officials Block Employee from Exercising Basic Rights
According to her charges, Green sent correspondence to both UAW and Ford officials on April 21, 2022, informing them she was resigning her union membership and cutting off union dues deductions from her wages. Neither granted her request, and Green instead received an email from UAW Local 862’s president notifying her that she must come to the union hall to be shown the purportedly “correct” method to leave the union.
At a meeting with union officials at the UAW union hall on April 25, 2022, UAW officials interrogated Green about why she wanted to leave the union. They also demanded she sign a letter listing “benefits” Green would supposedly forgo if she went through with exiting the union.
The charge contended that NLRB precedent prohibits requiring workers to sign such a document so they can exercise their right to end their union membership and stop dues deductions. UAW Local 862’s president apparently went even further. According to the charge, he told Green “if it were up to me, you’d lose your job for leaving the union.”
As this chain of events with the union was unfolding, Green was also trying to get Ford management to end the dues deductions. This also proved fruitless, as Ford officials gave her several confusing responses and even told her at one point that, under the union monopoly bargaining contract, she could only cease dues deductions in February 2023 – even though paperwork she signed previously stated it could be revoked at will.
The charges contended that Ford violated federal law by “continuing to take full union dues” from Green’s paycheck at union bosses’ behest even after she had requested that they stop. The charges also stated that UAW Local 862 violated the law by continuing to accept those illegally-seized dues, by “restricting her union membership resignation, and by making threatening comments that would chill an ordinary employee’s exercise of Section 7 rights.”
After an investigation into the charges, NLRB Region 9 agreed that Ford and UAW officials’ actions violated federal law. To avoid a federal prosecution for their illegal actions, the company and union quickly settled.
Green’s Foundation-won settlements mandate that Ford and the UAW union return all money taken from Green’s paycheck since April 21, 2022, the date she first tried to resign from the union. UAW officials must also abstain from threatening that “you should or could incur disciplinary problems and job loss with Ford Motor Company Louisville Assembly Plant . . . because you inform us that you are resigning from the union.”
Systemic UAW Disrespect for Workers’ Rights May Be Rampant at Louisville Ford Plant
“The recent federal probe into UAW officials stealing and misusing workers’ money has sent multiple top UAW bosses to jail, and uncovered a shocking culture of contempt for workers’ rights,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “As Ms. Green’s case shows, these issues are systemic and widespread, and any other Louisville Ford Assembly Plant worker facing UAW union boss attempts to coerce union membership or dues payment should contact the Foundation for free aid in protecting their legal rights.”
“Louisville Ford Assembly employees should know that, under Kentucky’s Right to Work law, union bosses can’t force them to join or pay any money to the union as a condition of employment,” Mix added.
With Right to Work Repeal Coming, Michigan Workers Seek a Vote to End Union ‘Representation’ They Oppose
Majority of TerryBerry employees in Grand Rapids signed decertification petition seeking to oust machinist union
Grand Rapids, MI (April 25, 2023) – TerryBerry Company employee Mary Soltysiak filed a petition for dozens of her coworkers with the National Labor Relations Board Region 7 (NLRB) seeking a vote to remove the International Association of Machinist of Aerospace Engineers (IAM) District Lodge 60/Local Lodge 475 union officials’ forced representation powers.
This workers’ decertification petition comes in the wake of Michigan legislators ramming through a bill to repeal their state’s decade-old and highly popular Right to Work law. When the repeal law takes effect, union officials will once again have the power to force workers to pay up or be fired in workplaces where the union has forced “representation” powers.
Mary Soltysiak and her coworkers at TerryBerry Company filed for a decertification vote on April 14, 2023, with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys. Previously, she had been under the protections of the Michigan Right to Work law since 2018. Her decertification petition contained signatures of a majority of the employees in the unit.
Under federal labor law, workers can trigger such a decertification vote with the support of 30% of workers in a unionized workplace. The NLRB should then promptly schedule a secret ballot election to determine whether a majority of workers want to end union officials’ power to impose a contract, including forced dues, on workers.
National Right to Work Foundation-backed reforms the NLRB adopted in 2020 made it somewhat easier for workers to exercise their right to hold votes to remove unwanted union officials. However, the Biden-appointed NLRB is currently engaging in rulemaking to roll back these protections and make it much harder to decertify a union.
Even under the 2020 “Election Protection Rule” overcoming union tactics to block such votes can often be difficult, which is why workers are encouraged to contact the Foundation for free legal representation in navigating the process. Worker interest in removing unwanted unions is growing nationwide, especially in Michigan. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys field numerous requests for free legal assistance in decertification cases, like the one brought by Soltysiak and her coworkers.
The NLRB’s own data shows that, currently, a unionized private sector worker is far more likely to be involved in a decertification effort as a nonunion worker is to be involved in a unionization campaign. NLRB statistics also show a 20% increase in decertification petitions last year versus 2021.
“Poll after poll showed that Michigan voters overwhelmingly supported Michigan’s Right to Work law, which doesn’t prevent a single person from voluntarily joining or paying dues to a union, but merely protects workers from being fired for non-payment,” observed Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “Instead of listening to voters and trusting workers to decide whether or not to subsidize union activities, anti-Right to Work legislators and Governor Whitmer decided to cater to politically-connected union bosses and gave them the power to extort workers to pay up or be fired.”
“As Michigan workers again face the prospect of mandatory union dues, we expect more will follow these TerryBerry workers and seek an end to union officials’ so-called ‘representation’ in their workplaces,” continued Mix. “Being forced under a union you oppose is bad enough, but then being told to pay up or be fired is even worse. Michigan workers should know that National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys stand ready to assist them in exercising their right to decertify unwanted unions.”
Philadelphia Public Defender Hits UAW Union with Charge for Illegally Threatening Wage Cut
Union official threatened Public Defenders who refused to authorize union to automatically deduct dues from their paychecks
Philadelphia, PA (April 24, 2023) – Philadelphia Public Defender Brunilda Vargas has filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against the United Autoworkers (UAW) Local 5502 union. The charge states that a union official threatened to reduce her wages and those of her coworkers if they refused to grant the union the power to deduct union dues directly from their paychecks. Vargas is receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
On April 18, 2023, Vargas filed the charge with the National Labor Relations Board Region 4 (NLRB) for the threats made against her and her colleagues at the Defender Association of Philadelphia. These threats came from a UAW union official against public defenders who chose not to sign automatic dues deduction authorization forms.
Because private sector workers in Pennsylvania lack the protection of a state Right to Work law, some union fees can be required as a condition of employment. However, employees can never be required to authorize automatic dues deductions from their paychecks under long-established federal law.
Had Vargas lived in a Right to Work state, not only would she have the right to refrain from automatic dues deductions from her paycheck, but also, she could refrain from financially supporting the union altogether. In Right to Work states, workers are fully-protected from mandatory union membership and financial support, both of which must be completely voluntary.
“It is appalling that a UAW Local 5502 union official would threaten public defenders’ wages for refusing to authorize deductions straight from their paychecks,” stated Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “If anything, UAW officials’ blatant disregard for longstanding federal law demonstrates why these public defenders are right to not want union officials pulling union dues directly out of their paychecks.”
“This case shows why Pennsylvania workers need the protection of a Right to Work law, so every worker can decide for themselves whether or not the union that supposedly represents them deserves their financial support,” added Mix.
National Right to Work Foundation Files Brief at Michigan Supreme Court Blasting TPOAM Union’s Forced Fee Scheme
Union “fee-for-grievance” scheme unlawfully pressures employees to become union members; Right to Work repeal does not make scheme legal
Lansing, MI (April 21, 2023) – The National Right to Work Foundation filed an amicus brief at the Michigan Supreme Court, opposing a scheme used by Technical, Professional, and Officeworkers Association of Michigan (TPOAM) union officials that weaponizes the union’s control over the grievance process to force nonmember public employees into paying fees to the union.
The case at issue is Technical, Professional and Officeworkers Association of Michigan (TPOAM) v. Daniel Lee Renner, in which Saginaw County employee Daniel Renner is challenging TPOAM union bosses’ so-called “fee-for-grievance” arrangement. Under it, union officials deprive Renner and other nonmember public employees of any power to file grievances themselves, and instead mandate that they pay fees to use the union’s grievance system – fees which often amount to a sum far greater than union dues.
Both the Michigan Employment Relations Committee (MERC) and the Michigan Court of Appeals have already rejected union officials’ arguments that they can refuse to file grievances for nonmembers unless nonmembers pay union fees. In Renner’s case, union officials demanded $1,290 from him simply to process his grievance to the first stage. Additionally, the union made clear to Renner that if the actual costs were higher as the proceeding continued, he would be responsible for more payments.
The current filing is the second amicus brief that the Foundation has submitted in the case. Notably, it addresses how Michigan legislators’ recent move to repeal the state’s popular Right to Work laws does not save the “fee-for-grievance” scheme from illegality. Michigan’s Right to Work protections prohibit union bosses from forcing workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment, and remain valid until the repeal takes effect 90 days after the legislature adjourns, which is expected to be sometime in early 2024.
Forcing Nonmembers to Pay into Union Grievance System Violates Free Choice Rights
The brief refutes union arguments that the “fee-for-grievance” scheme does not restrain or coerce Renner or other union nonmembers in violation of their right under Michigan’s Public Employment Relations Act (PERA) to refrain from union activity. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law that PERA is based on, has consistently been interpreted “more broadly than simply prohibiting union or employer violence or heavy handed reprisals,” the brief points out.
The brief notes that the 1953 National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case Hughes Tool Co. specifically held that a union’s refusal to process a nonmember’s grievance because he did not pay a fee violates workers’ right to refrain from union activity under the NLRA. “The NLRB has consistently reaffirmed these principles and Hughes Tool remains good law today,” the brief says.
In addition to ignoring a long line of NLRB precedents, the brief concludes, “TPOAM cavalierly defends its illegal fee on the basis that Renner made a choice to be a nonmember and he is the one requesting TPOAM assistance.” However, because Renner has a right under Michigan law to abstain from union activity, “[t]he fact TPOAM treated him differently because he exercised that statutory right is evidence it committed an unfair labor practice, not a defense.”
“TPOAM union officials’ scheme forcing nonmember public employees to pay into a union grievance system is illegal, just as it was both before and during Right to Work’s enactment in Michigan,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “As the Foundation’s amicus brief shows, TPOAM’s position ignores mountains of precedent and lets union bosses keep mandating fees designed to force dissenting workers into full union membership, in obvious violation of their rights.”
“Michigan public employees should also know that, as per the landmark Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME U.S. Supreme Court decision, they can’t be fired for refusal to join or financially support a union,” Mix added.
With Foundation Aid, Mayo Clinic Nurses Defeat Forced Union Dues Requirement
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, March/April 2023 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Nurses’ ultimate goal is to end Steelworkers union bosses’ so-called ‘representation’ completely
Austin, MN, Mayo nurse Erin Krulish and her coworkers hope to soon join Mankato, MN, Mayo nurses (above) in removing unwanted union “representation” from their facility.
AUSTIN, MN – Nurses at the Mayo Clinic Health System in Austin, Minnesota, recently voted overwhelmingly in a deauthorization election to end the power of United Steelworkers (USW) union officials to require nurses to pay up or be fired. The workers filed the deauthorization petition with National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 18 with free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
“We are so happy with the way the election turned out,” Mayo Clinic Austin nurse Erin Krulish commented. “I think it really shows that all of us came together to show the union that we don’t want to keep paying them when they are doing nothing for us.”
Krulish filed the deauthorization petition for her coworkers seeking to end the so-called “union security clause” that authorizes USW union bosses to have nurses fired for refusing to financially support union activities. The request seeking the vote to end United Steelworkers union officials’ forced-dues powers at Mayo Clinic Austin was signed by 49 of the 66 workers, well over the number required to trigger the NLRB-supervised election.
Ending Forced Dues Comes as Nurses Wait for Vote to Formally Remove Union
Minnesota is not a Right to Work state, meaning all workers in a unionized workplace can be required to pay dues or fees to a union as a condition of keeping their jobs. However, federal law does allow workers to hold deauthorization votes to end union officials’ legal authority to force workers to “pay up or be fired,” although winning such a vote can often be an uphill battle as independent workers have to take on professional forced-dues-funded union organizers.
The overwhelming 49-17 vote against mandatory union payments came as the nurses wait for the opportunity to end USW officials’ so-called “representation” at the facility completely, a process known as decertification. “We plan to decertify come next December when our contract is up and we are ready for another fight!” Krulish said following the deauthorization victory.
Currently, the non-statutory NLRB-invented “contract bar” doctrine blocks workers from holding a decertification vote to remove a union’s monopoly representation powers for up to three years when a union boss-imposed contract is in effect. Consequently, a deauthorization vote, which isn’t limited by the contract bar, was the nurses’ only option. If the nurses at the Austin Mayo Clinic do decertify as they plan, they will join Minnesota nurses at Mayo Clinic Mankato and Mayo Clinic St. James who voted to oust union officials from their hospitals in the last six months.
“No worker anywhere should be forced under so-called union ‘representation’ they oppose,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “So while we’re pleased Ms. Krulish and her coworkers were victorious against the Steelworkers union, this case also shows why it is past time to end the NLRB-sanctioned ‘contract bar’ which traps workers in union ranks they oppose for years at a time.”
“Ultimately, Minnesota needs a state Right to Work law to ensure that every individual worker has the freedom to decide whether or not to financially support a union, even those who can’t overcome the hurdles required to successfully navigate the complicated deauthorization process,” added Mix.
San Francisco Security Officer Battles Illegal SEIU Union Boss Discrimination
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, March/April 2023 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Case builds on Foundation wins for workers with religious objections to union affiliation
Last year was a banner year for workers of faith who sought free Foundation legal aid. Charlene Carter (left) and Dorothy Frame (right) both prevailed after facing discrimination for opposing union politics on religious grounds.
SAN FRANCISCO, CA – States like California that lack Right to Work laws grant immense powers to union bosses within their borders: They can legally have any employee fired under their monopoly control who refuses to pay dues to the union hierarchy.
However, thanks to the continuing successes of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys’ cutting-edge legal actions, employees with sincere religious objections to union affiliation are entitled to a religious accommodation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that permits them to stop funding a union. That applies even when other workers who do not have religious conflicts can be forced to pay up or be fired.
But Service Employees International Union (SEIU) bosses in San Francisco apparently can’t be bothered with obeying the law.
SEIU Chiefs Ignored Legal Requirement to Accommodate Employee
Thomas Ross, a San Francisco-area security officer employed by Allied Universal Security Services, is receiving free legal representation from Foundation attorneys in his case charging the SEIU and his employer with forcing him to join and financially support the union — after he told both parties his religious beliefs forbid union support.
Ross is a Christian and opposes union affiliation on religious grounds. Under U.S. civil rights law, unions and employers are required to accommodate religious objections to union payments. Additionally, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) prohibits unions and employers from forcing employees to join a union.
Because the SEIU union’s and Allied Universal’s demands violate both statutes, Ross filed two sets of federal charges with Foundation aid. The charges will be investigated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
According to his EEOC discrimination charges, Ross informed both the SEIU union and Allied Universal when he was hired in 2020 that his religious beliefs forbid union membership. He also asked for a religious accommodation.
Union Bosses Issued Blatantly Illegal Compulsory Membership Demand
Not only did both SEIU and Allied Universal ignore Ross’ request, but in July 2022, “Allied Universal . . . demanded that [he] sign a payroll deduction, join the union, and pay union dues.”
On August 31, 2022, Ross reminded Allied Universal of his religious objection to paying union dues, but on September 15, 2022, Ross’ “employer stated that union membership was compulsory and deducted union fees” from his paycheck without his consent. That is a clear violation of longstanding law, even for workers not seeking a religious accommodation.
Workers nationwide frequently turn to the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid when union chiefs snub their requests for religious accommodations or otherwise discriminate against them based on their religious beliefs. Last year, Foundation attorneys scored extraordinary victories for workers who faced union malfeasance after they resisted union affiliation on religious grounds.
Foundation Attorneys Notched Big Wins for Religious Freedom in 2022
In July 2022, Foundation staff attorneys won a multi-million-dollar jury verdict for Southwest flight attendant Charlene Carter, who had been ridiculed and later fired for voicing her religious opposition to the Transport Workers Union’s (TWU) political positions. Foundation attorneys also later won a federal court judgment for Carter, in which the judge ordered that Carter be reinstated and given the maximum amount of compensatory and punitive damages permitted by federal law.
“Bags fly free with Southwest,” began the decision. “But free speech didn’t fly at all with Southwest in this case.”
In March 2022, also with Foundation aid, Fort Campbell custodial worker Dorothy Frame won a settlement gaining a religious accommodation after Laborers International Union (LIUNA) officials unlawfully questioned her religious belief that she could not support the union’s political activities.
“The Foundation is proud to help working men and women who courageously stand up for their beliefs even in the midst of union coercion,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President and Legal Director Raymond LaJeunesse. “However, it’s important to recognize that, regardless of whether an employee’s objection to union affiliation is religious or not, no American worker should ever be forced to subsidize union activities they oppose.”
National Right to Work Foundation Issues Special Legal Notice to Rutgers Professors Impacted by Union Officials’ Strike Order
Rutgers employees can legally attend work regardless of union boss demands to strike
New Brunswick, NJ (April 13, 2023) – Today, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has issued a special legal notice to professors and other employees of Rutgers University. The notice was issued to inform Rutgers employees of their individual rights during the union official-ordered strike currently taking place.
The legal notice is available at the Foundation’s website: https://www.nrtw.org/legal-notice/legal-notice-rutgers04122023/.
On the morning of Monday, April 10, union officials from three Rutgers unions ordered a strike against the university. The officials were from the Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union (RAFU); Rutgers American Association of University Professors, American Federation of Teachers (AAUP-AFT); and Rutgers American Association of University Professors, Biomedical and Health Sciences of New Jersey (AAUP-BHSNJ).
The legal notice explains that, despite the lack of Right to Work protections in the state of New Jersey, non-union public sector workers still have rights under the First Amendment to abstain from union financial support. These rights are bolstered by the 2018 Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court ruling.
“The United States Supreme Court has held that nonmembers of a public-sector union have a First Amendment right not to pay any union fees or dues, unless they have freely waived their First Amendment rights,” the notice reads. “A union has the burden of proving employees waived their First Amendment rights by ‘clear and compelling’ evidence.”
In regards to union members, the Foundation’s notice informs workers that they maintain the right to resign from union membership at any time. The notice also suggests, if employees wish to continue working during the strike and avoid union discipline such as fines, that current union members resign their union membership at least one full day before returning to work.
“It is Foundation attorneys’ best legal opinion that public sector employees have the right to resign their membership in a union at any time. At least two federal district courts have reached that conclusion,” mentions the notice. “If you are now a union member and want to work during the strike, you should seriously consider resigning your union membership at least one day, if not more, BEFORE you return to work during the strike.”
“By initiating a strike that affects thousands of Rutgers employees, these union bosses are not only threatening the education of students, but are also potentially upending the livelihoods of countless families,” commented National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “Rutgers professors should know that they have the right to reject union boss strike orders and can continue working.”
“Unfortunately union misinformation and intimidation tactics are all too common during union boss-ordered strikes, which is why rank-and-file Rutgers employees must be on alert and should immediately contact the Foundation for free legal aid if they believe union officials may be violating their legal rights,” added Mix.
Special Legal Notice for Employees Affected by Rutgers Strike Order
Media reports show that union officials with three unions – Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union (RAFU); Rutgers American Association of University Professors, American Federation of Teachers (AAUP-AFT); and Rutgers American Association of University Professors, Biomedical and Health Sciences of New Jersey (AAUP-BHSNJ) – have initiated a strike this week at Rutgers University.
This situation raises serious concerns for professors and other university employees who believe they have much to lose from a union boss-ordered strike and want to continue working to not abandon their students, and to support themselves and their families.
All employees have the legal right to rebuff union officials’ strike demands, but it is important for them to be informed before they do so.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO WORK DURING A STRIKE, READ ALL OF THIS SPECIAL NOTICE BEFORE RETURNING TO WORK – IT MIGHT SAVE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS!
The Foundation wants you to learn about your legal rights from independent sources. You should not rely on what self-interested union officials tell you. For more than five decades, Foundation attorneys have worked in the courts and labor agencies to protect and expand the rights of individual employees in situations such as strikes. It is the nation’s premier organization exclusively dedicated to providing free legal assistance to employee victims of forced unionism abuse.
Rutgers Employees under AAUP-AFT, AAUP-BHSNJ, or RAFU monopoly representation should know they have the following rights:
1) A union has no disciplinary power over nonmembers and cannot discipline them for crossing a picket line and working during a strike. If you are currently not a member of an AAUP-AFT, AAUP-BHSNJ, RAFU, or any affiliated union, you have the right to go to work even when the union bosses have ordered a strike.
2) If you are currently a union member, you have the right to resign your union membership. Union officials can (and often do) levy large fines against union members who work during a strike. If you are now a union member and want to work during the strike, you should seriously consider resigning your union membership at least one day, if not more, BEFORE you return to work during the strike. That is the only way to avoid possible ruinous union fines and other discipline. To have the best legal defense possible against fines the union may try to impose anyway, you should give the union notice of your resignation a day or two BEFORE you cross the picket line so that when you return to work during the strike you are not a member of the union.
The decisions whether to resign your union membership and/or cross the picket line are wholly yours. The Foundation is simply providing this information so that your decisions are informed. If you are a member and decide to resign your union membership, please follow this link, https://myjanusrights.org/, for a sample letter resigning your membership in the union and revoking any authorization for the union and employer to collect any fees or dues from your pay. While you have the right to revoke any dues authorization at any time, state law may affect the date the revocation becomes effective. If you encounter any difficulties in exercising your right to resign union membership and revoke union dues deductions, you can contact the Foundation to request free legal aid at www.nrtw.org/free-legal-aid/.
NOTE: Although not legally required, the best practice to send your union resignation and dues revocation letters to the union and employer by certified mail, return receipt requested, and save copies of your letters and return receipts to prove delivery. If you hand deliver a letter, make sure that you have a reliable witness to the date and means of delivery. In our experience, angry and dishonest union officials often pretend they did not actually receive resignations and initiate discipline against non-striking workers anyway. If you encounter any difficulties in exercising your right to work during a strike, you can contact the Foundation to request free legal aid at www.nrtw.org/free-legal-aid/.
3) It is Foundation attorneys’ best legal opinion that public sector employees have the right to resign their membership in a union at any time. At least two federal district courts have reached that conclusion. See McCahon v. Pa. Turnpike Comm’n, 491 F. Supp. 2d 522 (M.D. Pa. 2007); Debont v. City of Poway, No. 98CV0502-K, 1998 WL 415844 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 14, 1998). If you encounter any difficulties in resigning your union membership, you can contact the Foundation to request free legal aid at www.nrtw.org/free-legal-aid/.
4) The United States Supreme Court has held that nonmembers of a public-sector union have a First Amendment right not to pay any union fees or dues, unless they have freely waived their First Amendment rights. See Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31, 138 S. Ct. 2448, 2486 (2018). A union has the burden of proving employees waived their First Amendment rights by “clear and compelling” evidence. Some unions have claimed that employees who authorized their employer to deduct union dues and fees in the past have waived their First Amendment rights. Whether a dues deduction authorization is an effective waiver depends on when it was signed and how it was worded. New Jersey law may also affect the date the dues deduction revocation becomes effective. You can contact the Foundation to request free legal aid at www.nrtw.org/free-legal-aid/ if you encounter any difficulties in getting the union and employer to stop collecting union fees or dues from you.
5) If you wish to eject an unwanted union hierarchy from your workplace, you may have the right to petition for a secret ballot decertification election to do so. More information about New Jersey laws on decertification is available here: https://www.state.nj.us/perc/documents/NJ_PERC_Representation_Petition_Form.pdf. If you have questions about how to proceed with decertification, need assistance getting through the NJ PERB process, or encounter legal difficulties interfering with your efforts, you can contact the Foundation to request free legal aid at www.nrtw.org/free-legal-aid/.
