Full Foundation Action July/August 2024 Newsletter Now Online
All articles from the May/June 2024 issue of Foundation Action are now online.
In this issue:
- California Farmworkers Fight Back Against Lie-Ridden Union ‘Card Check’
- Dependable Highway Express Workers Successfully Oust Teamsters Union Officials
- Foundation-Backed Workers Push Back Against UAW Bosses’ Coercive Tactics
- Security Guard Wins Groundbreaking ‘Janus’ Religious Accommodation
- MI, OH Kroger Employees Challenge UFCW Forced-Dues-For-Politics Schemes
- MIT Grad Student Charges ‘Marxist’ Union with Illegal Forced Dues for Politics
MIT Grad Student Charges ‘Marxist’ Union with Illegal Forced Dues for Politics
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, July/August 2024 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Five other MIT students also filed religious discrimination charges against radical UE
More clouds are gathering over at MIT as yet another graduate student targets the university with federal charges. She maintains the GSU union and MIT administration are illegally funneling student money into union politics.
BOSTON, MA – Following five Jewish students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) filing federal religious discrimination charges against the same union, the MIT Graduate Student Union (GSU-UE, an affiliate of the United Electrical Workers union) is now facing new federal unfair labor practice charges from civil engineering graduate student Katerina Boukin.
Under a series of controversial National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rulings, graduate students at private universities like MIT are treated as “employees” of the university who can be subjected to forced union “representation.” Boukin’s charges, filed at the NLRB with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, maintain that union officials are unlawfully seizing money from her research compensation to support union political activities she abhors.
Extremist Union Politics Foisted on Graduate Students
“GSU union officials are going above and beyond what is legal and are forcing me to pay for their political activities, including their opposition to Israel and promotion of Leninist-Marxist global revolution, that I find deeply offensive,” commented Boukin. “The GSU’s political agenda has nothing to do with my research as a graduate student at MIT, or the relationships I have with my professors and the university administration, yet outrageously they demand I fund their radical ideology.”
Boukin’s charges seek to enforce her rights under the Foundation-won 1988 CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision. This landmark ruling established that even in states like Massachusetts that lack Right to Work protections, union officials cannot legally compel individuals to pay for union expenses unrelated to bargaining activities, like union boss political activities.
According to Boukin’s charge, GSU union officials are violating the law by claiming she cannot exercise her rights under Beck because she missed a union-created annual “window period.” However, her charge asserts this restriction is blatantly illegal.
In fact, the GSU union was already forced to settle a prior Beck case, agreeing there to properly process students’ attempts to exercise their Beck rights. Boukin’s charges against the union argue that the union may be violating not only her rights but also the settlement it made with the NLRB.
GSU Union Bosses Also Charged for Illegal Religious Discrimination
MIT graduate student Will Sussman, along with fellow students Joshua Fried, Akiva Gordon, Tamar Kadosh Zhitomirsky, and Adina Bechhofer, have also filed religious discrimination charges against the GSU union with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). They’ve also obtained free Foundation legal help.
The students, who are Jewish, oppose the union’s advocacy for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) anti-Israel movement. Despite asking union officials for legally-required religious exemptions from union dues payment, GSU officials denied their requests and even attempted to explain in letters how the students didn’t truly understand their faith.
As of this article, those EEOC charges remain pending against the GSU, with a federal lawsuit likely the next step if the union refuses to stop its illegal discrimination.
“Freedom of association is apparently a foreign concept to GSU union officials, who are flouting layers upon layers of federal law to compel students to fund their radical political agenda,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President and Legal Director William Messenger. “However, both this case and Foundation attorneys’ cases for the five Jewish MIT graduate students show on a deeper level that the choice to provide support to a union should rest solely with workers, who may have sincere religious, political, or other objections to funding any or all of a union’s activities.”
National Right to Work Foundation Issues Special Legal Notice to Boeing Employees Impacted by IAM Union Boss Strike Order
Foundation notifies employees that those wishing to continue working during a strike should resign their memberships before returning to work
Seattle, WA (September 16, 2023) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has released a special legal notice to the roughly 30,000 Boeing employees reportedly affected by the strike order issued by International Association of Machinists (IAM) union officials last week.
The Foundation’s legal notice informs Boeing employees of their rights, including their right to rebuff the strike order and to keep working to support their families as the strike is ongoing. The notice discusses why workers across the country frequently turn to the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid in such situations.
“The situation presents serious concerns for employees who believe there is much to lose from a union-ordered strike,” the notice reads. “That is why workers confronted with strike demands frequently contact the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation to learn how they can avoid fines and other harsh union discipline for continuing to report to work to support themselves and their families.”
The full notice is available at https://www.nrtw.org/BoeingStrike/.
The notice outlines the process that Boeing employees should follow if they want to exercise their right to return to work during the strike and avoid punishment by union bosses, complete with sample union membership resignation letters. The notice reminds workers that IAM union officials have no disciplinary power over workers who are not union members, and advises employees who wish to work during a strike to resign their memberships before returning to work.
“Union officials can (and often do) fine actual union members who work during a strike,” the notice says. “So, you should seriously consider resigning at least one day BEFORE you return to work during a strike, which is the best way to avoid these union fines and discipline.
“If possible, use certified mail, return receipt requested, and save copies of your letters and the return receipt to prove delivery,” the notice continues, adding that workers who choose to submit their union resignations to union officials in person should have a reliable witness present to combat potential false claims from union officials that they did not actually receive a worker’s resignation.
Further, the notice reminds employees of their rights to cut off all union dues payments in the absence of a monopoly bargaining contract between IAM union officials and Boeing management. The notice encourages employees to seek free legal aid from the Foundation if they experience union resistance as they attempt to exercise any of these rights.
“IAM union officials have a history of seeking to increase their own power instead of doing what’s right for rank-and-file workers,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation attorneys recently helped a Seattle Boeing worker take legal action against IAM officials for seizing his money illegally.
“On the eve of a strike order that may last months, many Boeing workers may decide that going on strike is not the best course of action for them, and Foundation attorneys stand ready to aid these workers in defending their right to continue working and providing for their families,” added Mix.
Majority of Workers at Detroit-Area Hydraulic Tooling Firm Seek Vote to Oust UAW Union Bosses
Michigan workers continue to seek freedom from union bosses, fight back against union boss malfeasance in wake of Right to Work repeal
Detroit, MI (September 12, 2024) – Production and maintenance employees at Hydra-Lock Corp. a hydraulic tooling company based in Mt. Clemens, Michigan, have just submitted a petition seeking a vote to remove United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 155 union officials from power at their workplace. Hydra-Lock employee Keith Woody submitted the petition to National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 7 in Detroit with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, which includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Woody’s petition contains signatures from the majority of his colleagues in support of having a decertification election, well over the 30% threshold of employee signatures needed to trigger such a vote under NLRB rules.
Michigan legislators’ 2023 repeal of the state’s Right to Work protections went into effect this February, meaning UAW union officials have the legal power to enforce contracts that require Woody and his coworkers to pay dues or fees as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In Right to Work states, in contrast, union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary.
If Woody and his coworkers’ decertification effort succeeds, they will be free from both the UAW’s power to speak and contract for all workers in the facility (including the majority that oppose the union), and the obligation to pay dues as a condition of employment.
Michigan Legislators Repealed Right to Work Despite Massive UAW Scandal
In March 2023, a bare majority of Michigan legislators voted along partisan lines to repeal Right to Work at the behest of union special interests, ending workers’ ability to decide for themselves whether or not union officials deserve their dues money. The imposition of union bosses’ power to force employees to “pay up or be fired” came despite polling showing Michiganders, including those in union households, overwhelmingly opposed the elimination of workers’ Right to Work protections.
After the repeal became effective this February, workers from across the Great Lakes State sought help from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in escaping union bosses’ forced-dues demands. The total cases that Foundation attorneys have filed for Michigan workers in 2024 is already well more than double the number for all of 2023. Foundation-backed workers from across the state have recounted a wide variety of union boss misdeeds since the repeal, including forcing workers with religious objections to join and pay dues, taking dues money directly from workers’ paychecks without their permission, coercing workers into contributing to union Political Action Committees (PACs), and more.
The Michigan Right to Work repeal also came after a years-long federal probe revealed massive corruption within the UAW hierarchy. At least 13 UAW officials received jail sentences for embezzling and spending millions in workers’ dues money on luxury goods, vacations, and other personal items. Federal agents are still monitoring the Detroit-based union, and have recently investigated reports that current UAW President Shawn Fain is misappropriating union property.
“The UAW’s implosion over the embezzlement scandal should have been more than enough evidence for Michigan legislators that workers deserve the right to withhold their money from union bosses who are corrupt, abrasive, or just flat out ineffective,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Instead, as a purely political favor, Michigan policymakers granted union officials the power to have workers fired for refusing to support union agendas, and we’re now seeing worker backlash throughout the state.
“Michigan workers should not hesitate to contact National Right to Work Foundation attorneys for free assistance in standing up for what rights they still have in this new legal environment,” Mix added.
MI, OH Kroger Employees Challenge UFCW Forced-Dues-For-Politics Schemes
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, July/August 2024 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Foundation-backed workers battle union seizures of PAC money, confusing dues forms
President Biden has worked hard to give UFCW bosses and other union officials across America drastically more coercive power over workers. So it’s no wonder UFCW officials are trying to illicitly funnel employee money into union PACs.
DETROIT, MI – Union bosses in states without Right to Work laws are granted the extraordinary legal power to demand that workers pay dues or fees just to keep their jobs. But this perk doesn’t stop many union chiefs in those states from going beyond what is legally permitted to funnel more worker cash into their political activities or other agenda items.
Two recent cases National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys are litigating for Kroger Grocery employees Roger Cornett, who works just outside Detroit, Michigan, and James Carroll, who works at a store in Fairfield, Ohio, represent just the latest examples of union officials’ tactics designed to require employees to pay for union political activities without obtaining legally-required consent.
In both cases, United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union officials demanded employees agree to formal union membership and to pay full union dues to keep their jobs, which decades-old Supreme Court cases forbid even in non-Right to Work states. In fact, Cornett states in his federal charges against Kroger and the union that UFCW union officials lack a legal basis to demand money from any worker at all.
Neither situation is helped by the fact that Kroger, a supermarket company with a long history of being complicit when union officials violate its employees’ rights, not only did nothing to defend the rights of its employees but actually threatened the employees for not going along with union schemes.
Union Socks Away Worker Cash for PAC, Despite No Legal Authority
Cornett’s charges recount that he asked Kroger officials in February if there was an updated version of the union contract that would require him and other nonmembers to pay dues as a condition of employment in light of the repeal of Michigan’s Right to Work law. Neither UFCW nor Kroger provided Cornett with such a contract in response to his request.
The lack of a contract eviscerates the UFCW’s ability to demand any money from workers. Under longstanding federal law, even in a state without Right to Work protections, union officials can only require employees to pay dues as a condition of employment if there exists a contract with a valid forced-dues clause.
Union officials also told Cornett and other workers that it was a condition of employment for employees to become union members, authorize direct deductions of union dues from their pay, and “sign all or part of the three-part Union membership application and checkoff form” — the latter of which included a page authorizing deductions for the union’s Political Action Committee (PAC).
The Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision forbids union officials from forcing nonmember workers to pay money for any expenses outside the union’s core bargaining functions, while federal law prevents union bosses from requiring workers to authorize payroll deductions of union dues (as opposed to less intrusive methods) or to pay money to a union PAC used to fund union boss-backed political candidates.
Cornett says in his charges that he decided to sign the three-part form in order to keep his job, but Foundation attorneys are fighting to ensure he will be vindicated for each and every violation by union officials and Kroger.
Ohio Worker Duels UFCW Over Illegal ‘Dual-Purpose’ Membership Form
In Ohio, Kroger employee James Carroll has charged UFCW union bosses with coercing him into signing an illegal “dual-purpose” membership form, which seeks only one employee signature for authorization of both union membership and dues deductions.
Federal labor law requires that any authorization for union dues deductions be voluntary and separate from a union membership application, as workers have the right to abstain from forced union membership even in non-Right to Work states where some fees can be required. In his case, Carroll is also battling Kroger’s continuing deduction of full union dues from his paycheck at UFCW chiefs’ behest, despite his lack of consent.
“Not only did UFCW bosses present me with a form that clearly violates federal labor law, but they also threatened that I would lose my job if I didn’t sign it,” commented Carroll. “This only serves to show me that UFCW bosses don’t care about my rights and are simply interested in getting union dues out of me, and it’s sad to see my employer going along with this as well.”
Right to Work Protects Worker Freedom Where Federal Law Doesn’t
“Even where Right to Work isn’t in effect, federal law protects the right of workers not to be forced into formal union membership that includes support for union politics. But union bosses regularly seek to exploit their power to demand payments that go beyond what the law allows,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “We’re proud to help Mr. Carroll and Mr. Cornett defend their rights, but ultimately Ohio and Michigan workers need the protection of Right to Work so union financial support is fully voluntary and employees have a clear right to say ‘no’ to any union demand for payment.”
Medstar EMT Hits United Food & Commercial Workers Union with Federal Charges for Illegal Dues Deductions
Growing list of charges exposes how union bosses are violating workers’ rights following repeal of Michigan Right to Work law
Detroit, MI (September 10, 2024) – Nicholas Lenning, an EMT with Medstar Ambulance in Clinton Township, Michigan, has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Union Local 876 for illegally deducting union dues out of his paycheck in violation of federal law. Lennings filed the new unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
Lenning filed the federal unfair labor practice charges against UFCW Local 876 after union officials deducted dues from his paycheck without having a signed dues authorization card, and without providing him with notice regarding his rights under the Supreme Court’s Communication Workers of America v. Beck precedent, which was argued and won by attorneys for the Right to Work Foundation.
Lenning’s charge notes that in nearly three years as an employee of Medstar Ambulance, Lenning was never a union member, never signed a membership card and never signed a dues authorization card. The charge further details how, despite lacking his consent, UFCW officials began deducting dues in March 2024, at times appearing to seize extra funds for back union dues. The deductions started shortly after Michigan’s Right to Work law was formally repealed in early February. Lenning even emailed union stewards requesting information about his rights under Beck, but never received any response from the union. NLRB agents will now investigate Lenning’s charges against UFCW officials.
The charges from Lenning are the most recent in a flurry of Foundation-backed cases for Michigan workers who are seeking to challenge or escape union bosses’ coercive power in the wake of Michigan’s repeal of its Right to Work law. Since the repeal became effective this February, union bosses have had the legal power to require workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. In states with Right to Work protections, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
However, even in states like Michigan that lack Right to Work protections and allow for forced-fee requirements, longstanding federal law prohibits union bosses from requiring workers to authorize the direct deduction of union dues from their paychecks. The Communications Workers of America v. Beck Supreme Court decision additionally forbids union bosses in non-Right to Work states from forcing workers to pay money for any activities beyond the union’s bargaining functions, such as political lobbying, and organizing.
Without Right to Work, Michigan Workers Increasingly Taking Legal Action Against Union Boss Forced Dues Abuses
In March 2023, a bare majority of Michigan legislators voted along partisan lines to repeal Right to Work at the behest of union special interests, ending workers’ ability to decide for themselves whether or not union officials deserve their dues money. The imposition of union bosses’ power to force employees to “pay up or be fired” came despite polling showing Michiganders, including those in union households, overwhelmingly opposed the elimination of workers’ Right to Work protections.
After the repeal became effective this February, workers from across the Great Lakes State sought help from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in escaping union bosses’ forced-dues demands. The total cases that Foundation attorneys have filed for Michigan workers in 2024 is already well more than double the number for all of 2023.
“As this case and others demonstrate, within days of Michigan workers being stripped of their Right to Work protections, union bosses were attempting to use the repeal as cover to justify forced dues collections, even in violation of longstanding federal law,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The flood of legal aid requests Foundation staff attorneys are fielding from Michigan workers since the repeal of Right to Work shows once again that union bosses’ greed for forced dues will lead them to callously and blatantly violate the rights of the very workers they claim to ‘represent.’”
“Without the clear legal line that Right to Work provides by ensuring that all union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary, there unfortunately is little reason to think these types of abuses of workers’ legal rights will not continue to spread across the Great Lake State,” added Mix.
AT&T Employees Nationwide Continue Winning Efforts to Remove Unwanted CWA Union Bosses Imposed Through ‘Card Check’
Mississippi and Louisiana AT&T Mobility employees seek to join others in California, Tennessee and Texas who have successfully ousted the CWA
Mississippi & Louisiana (September 5, 2024) – In-Home Experts from AT&T Mobility locations across Mississippi and Louisiana have joined together to file petitions seeking elections to remove Communications Workers of America (CWA) union officials from power in their workplaces. The two groups of AT&T employees seek to join with hundreds of other AT&T workers in California, Tennessee and Texas who have already won their efforts to remove the CWA. All five groups of employees received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Michael Swift, an In-Home Expert for AT&T Mobility, filed the “decertification petition” with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on behalf of his coworkers across four AT&T Mobility locations in Mississippi. Marquita Jones, a Louisiana-based In-Home Expert, did the same for her colleagues across four Louisiana locations.
If the AT&T Mobility In-Home Experts win their decertification efforts, they will join well over 800 AT&T employees from across California, Texas, and Tennessee, who have also successfully challenged CWA card checks. Under card check, union organizers bypass the secret ballot election process and instead collect cards face-to-face from employees that are then counted as “votes” for the union. Without the privacy of a secret ballot vote, many workers report being pressured, bullied or threatened into signing, which is among the reasons why card check has long been recognized as inherently unreliable and abuse-prone.
In Tennessee and elsewhere, CWA union officials argued the units of AT&T In-Home Experts who had been unionized through card check were already “merged” into a larger unit comprised of thousands of employees, which would effectively trap workers in the union in perpetuity because petitioning for a decertification vote in such a large, spread out unit would be virtually impossible.
Fortunately, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys successfully countered CWA lawyers’ “merged unit” gambit, resulting in the votes being scheduled. Faced with an inevitable vote among the workers, in Tennessee, California and Texas, CWA officials conceded defeat instead of facing a decertification vote.
Biden-Harris NLRB Will Soon Block Workers from Challenging Dubious Union “Card Check” Drives
CWA union officials used the card check process to claim monopoly bargaining power over AT&T In-Home Experts in California, Tennessee, and Texas. However, Foundation-backed 2020 reforms to the NLRB’s election rules permitted all three sets of workers to successfully challenge the CWA union’s ascent to power.
Collectively referred to as the “Election Protection Rule,” the reforms permit employees to submit decertification petitions within a 45-day window after the finalization of a card check. The Election Protection Rule also prevents union officials from manipulating charges they file alleging employer misconduct to block workers from casting ballots in a decertification election, among other things.
Unfortunately, the Biden-Harris NLRB in Washington, DC, issued a final rule in late July that will undo the Election Protection Rule and make it much harder for rank-and-file workers to exercise their right to vote out union officials they oppose. While the rule change will not take effect in time to stop the AT&T Mobility employees from having the decertification votes they requested, it will likely quash or substantially delay similar efforts after the repeal takes effect at the end of September.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, which includes administering votes to certify and decertify unions. Both employees filed the decertification petitions in August with signatures from more than the 30% of employees required, and both seek to challenge so-called “card check” unionizations that CWA union bosses foisted on their coworkers.
“If Mrs. Jones and Mr. Swift had filed their decertification petitions just a few months later, they would be trapped in a union they oppose, denied even the chance at decertification vote for years and likely forever,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “This is yet another example of the Biden-Harris NLRB steamrolling the rights of independent-minded employees, so union bosses can expand their forced dues ranks.
“American workers don’t deserve to be stripped of this freedom, and with the changes set to take place in weeks, employees seeking a vote to remove an unwanted union should act quickly,” added Mix. “Those who are inevitably prevented from voting out unwanted union bosses due to this cynical rule change are also encouraged to contact the Foundation to explore their legal options.”
Security Guard Wins Groundbreaking ‘Janus’ Religious Accommodation
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, July/August 2024 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
À la Janus, religious objector to union affiliation is free from all forced payments
The landmark Janus SCOTUS case, argued by Foundation Legal Director William Messenger, profoundly strengthened public employees’ First Amendment rights. But it appears the impact of the case is just beginning.
SAN FRANCISCO, CA – National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have been trailblazers in scoring legal protections for independent-minded workers who oppose joining or paying dues to a union on religious grounds. Over the years, Foundation attorneys have helped workers from a variety of faiths secure religious accommodations to forced-dues payment.
Earlier this year, Foundation attorneys achieved a breakthrough in this area of the law. In their case for Thomas Ross, a San Francisco-based employee of security company Allied Universal who sought a faith-based exemption from paying dues to a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) affiliate, Foundation attorneys won an unprecedented settlement. It not only frees Ross from any requirement to pay dues or fees to the union, but also frees him from any obligation to pay an amount equivalent to dues to a charity, which has been the dominant form of accommodation in the past for religious objectors.
Union Demanded Religious Worker Violate Faith, Breaking Federal Laws
Ross is a Christian who opposes union affiliation on religious grounds. Ross informed both the SEIU union and Allied Universal when he was hired in 2020 that his religious beliefs disallowed union membership and that he needed an accommodation. In addition to ignoring that request, in 2022 his employer told him that union membership was mandatory and “demanded that [he] sign a payroll deduction, join the [union], and pay union dues,” according to filings in his case.
Ross fought back by filing federal discrimination charges against the union and Allied Universal at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), as well as by filing unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires unions and employers to accommodate religious objections to union payments. Additionally, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) prohibits mandatory union membership, even in non-Right to Work states like California.
Ross’ Foundation-backed legal battle against SEIU and Allied Universal continued into 2023, when Foundation attorneys appealed a specious NLRB decision which attempted to dispose of the issue as a mere administrative error on the employer’s part. Finally, in 2024, the SEIU and Allied Universal backed down and settled the case, conceding a full religious accommodation to Ross.
The terms of the settlement state that Allied Universal and SEIU “will not enforce the collective bargaining agreement’s union membership and fee provisions against Ross . . . [and] will not force Ross to pay any union fees while he is employed by Allied Universal.”
In an article in the Baylor Law Review following the settlement, Foundation attorneys Bruce Cameron and Blaine Hutchison argue that, in light of the Foundation’s landmark 2018 Supreme Court victory in Janus v. AFSCME, religious accommodations like Ross’ should be the standard for future cases involving religious objectors to union membership and dues payment. In Janus, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment prohibits forcing public sector employees to join or pay dues to a union as a condition of employment.
Janus Shows Right Way to Accommodate Religious Employees
The article points out that the Supreme Court in Janus knocked down the so-called “free-rider” and “labor-peace” arguments that union lawyers typically use to justify forcing religious objectors to pay dues money to a charity. In Janus, the article explains, “The Court showed that nonmembers need not pay fees to compensate the union or to prevent labor unrest.”
The payment-to-charity scheme simply “punishes individuals for following their faith,” the article says. “Janus shows the proper solution: religious objectors need not pay any forced union fees.”
“Mr. Ross fought bravely with help from Foundation attorneys, and has opened up a new horizon for religious employees across the country,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The idea that union officials can force religious objectors to make any kind of payment clearly runs counter to America’s core ideals of freedom of religion and freedom of association, and it’s high time that courts recognize more robust protections for those rights.
“However, it’s important to recognize that, regardless of whether an employee’s objection to union affiliation is religious in nature or not, no American worker should ever be forced to subsidize union activities they oppose,” Mix added.
