Construction Workers’ Unanimous Vote to Remove Union Certified, Union Officials Drop Bid to Overturn Election
2020 Labor Board reforms stopped union boss attempt to block election, resulting in 13-0 vote against union ‘representation’
Houston, TX (December 17, 2021) – Yesterday the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) formally certified the results of a union decertification election in which workers at MDS Boring & Drilling in Houston voted unanimously to remove International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) officials from their workplace. The overwhelming election results were finalized after union officials dropped charges they had filed against the company that could have used by union lawyers to overturn the result.
Ballots were mailed to eligible employees on October 22 after Seth Patrick, an MDS Boring employee, petitioned the NLRB for a vote to remove IUOE officials from his workplace. He filed his petition with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, and collected signatures from enough of his coworkers to trigger an NLRB-conducted decertification election.
On November 19, the NLRB tallied the results and announced that the workers had voted unanimously 13-0 to remove IUOE Local 450 officials. However, the NLRB would not then certify the result because union officials had previously filed unfair labor practice charges against MDS Boring that served to delay certification of the election results.
Under the NLRB’s old rules, such “blocking charge” allegations against an employer would have been grounds for cancelling the vote or delaying it for months or even years until the charges were resolved. Using the “blocking charge” tactic, sometimes repeatedly, union officials often trapped workers into union ranks nearly indefinitely, despite overwhelming worker opposition to union affiliation. In states without Right to Work laws that make financial support of unions voluntary, this incentivized union bosses to drag out the process so they could collect more forced dues from workers.
However, thanks to Foundation-backed “blocking charge” reforms adopted by the NLRB in 2020, elections themselves cannot be delayed by union litigation. Instead, a vote is held, and any extraneous litigation occurs after the election results are announced. In the case of MDS Boring, the vote demonstrated that IUOE officials lacked the support of even a single worker, making it far more difficult for union officials to justify a drawn-out effort to remain in power.
“A unanimous vote proved beyond a doubt that MDS Boring workers didn’t want IUOE officials’ so-called ‘representation,’” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “Under the old system, union officials could have stalled the election for months or years to retain power. Thanks to the new Foundation-backed NLRB reforms, these workers were able to promptly hold the vote, which then demonstrated that each and every worker wanted the union out of their workplace.”
National Right to Work Foundation Issues Special Legal Notice for Holiday Temporary Employees
Notice: Despite union boss claims, workers who spend 30 days or less on the job cannot be forced to pay any union dues or fees as a condition of employment
Washington, DC (December 14, 2021) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has published a special legal notice for workers in transportation, retail, foodservice, and other industries who have been hired temporarily to meet demand during the 2021 holiday season. The notice warns that union officials can and often do deceive temporary staff into joining or paying dues to a union with which they do not wish to associate, and details the rights that employees have to resist such illegal demands.
The notice also provides contact information for the Foundation’s staff attorneys so temporary workers can obtain free legal assistance in exercising their right to be free of unwanted union affiliation. In one instance, Foundation attorneys aided a Stockton, CA, seasonal UPS worker, who received a paycheck for $0 after UPS management deducted full union dues from his paycheck at the behest of Teamsters union officials.
The full notice is available in both English and Spanish here: https://www.nrtw.org/special-notice-for-all-seasonal-and-temporary-employees/.
“If you are a temporary worker in any state, regardless of whether it has Right to Work protections,” the notice reads, “you do not necessarily have to join a union or pay union fees as a condition of employment for your temporary job. Union officials and some employers may wrongly tell you it is necessary for you to join a union or pay union fees, but there are some stipulations.”
State Right to Work protections ensure that no private-sector worker can be forced to financially support a union just to stay employed. However, even in non-Right to Work states where private-sector employees can normally be compelled to pay a portion of union dues just to keep their jobs, the notice explains that seasonal workers “should understand first and foremost that if you are working for LESS THAN 30 DAYS on the job, then you are not legally obligated to pay union fees or join a union.”
The notice also urges temporary workers not to sign any documents authorizing union membership or permitting union officials to deduct dues directly out of their wages, explaining that forcing a worker to sign either kind of document is illegal. “Forced union membership could trap you into paying union dues and fees well after you have ended your seasonal employment,” the notice reads.
Finally, the notice encourages seasonal employees to reach out immediately to the Foundation’s legal team if they encounter pressure from their employer or union officials or have questions about their situation.
“American workers who step up during the holidays and go the extra mile to make the season special do not deserve to be subjected to union boss coercion, but Foundation staff attorneys have encountered countless situations in which greedy union bosses misled new workers who don’t understand their rights,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Seasonal workers should not hesitate to contact the Foundation if they believe they are being forced to fund or otherwise associate with an unwanted union in violation of their legal rights.”
Georgia Ecolab Workers Vote to Remove RWDSU Union but Union Bosses Attempt to Overturn Election Results
RWDSU officials are also trying to reverse Alabama Amazon workers’ vote against unionization, & were recently successfully ousted by NYC car wash employees
Atlanta, GA (December 10, 2021) – National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix today slammed Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Union Southeast Council (RWDSU) union officials for seeking to nullify McDonough, GA, Ecolab employees’ secret ballot vote to remove RWDSU from their workplace:
“RWDSU officials have demonstrated in Alabama and in other places across the country this year that they have a penchant for opposing the will of the same employees they claim to ‘represent.’ Now they’re using questionable charges against Ecolab management to block a clear employee vote against them.
“No American worker should be trapped under the control of a union they oppose. Foundation staff attorneys will continue to help the Ecolab workers until their right to dispense with unwanted union officials is vindicated.”
Ecolab employee Irvin Arnold spearheads the effort to kick out RWDSU bosses. In late October, with free Foundation legal aid, he submitted a petition signed by enough of his colleagues to prompt the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to conduct a decertification vote amongst his colleagues.
Arnold and his coworkers’ effort marks the second time Foundation attorneys have assisted workers in removing unwanted RWDSU officials in the past month alone. In October, Ervin Par of Queens, NY-based Main Street Car Wash submitted the second valid decertification petition in his and his coworkers’ three-year attempt to remove RWDSU bosses from their workplace. Rather than face an employee vote that would have likely ended in RWDSU’s defeat, its agents disclaimed interest in continuing their control over the car wash in early November.
The NLRB, the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal private-sector labor law and for adjudicating disputes between employers, unions, and individual workers, administered the vote among Arnold and his Ecolab coworkers on December 2, in which the employees voted against continued union control in the facility. The RWDSU is notably the same union that Bessemer, AL, Amazon employees rejected by a more than 2-to-1 margin during a highly publicized April 2021 union election.
According to Arnold’s original petition, the election was held among more than 50 Ecolab employees that were under RWDSU officials’ monopoly control, including “reliability technicians…maintenance leads, production associates, mixers, bulk bay spotter/loaders, logistics associates, production team coaches, warehouse lead workers and label control associates.”
RWDSU officials are now trying to overturn the employees’ vote by alleging that Ecolab officials interfered in the employees’ effort to get rid of union bosses. Filing these objections allows the union to remain in control in the workplace until the NLRB investigates the union’s claims.
The Ecolab and Main Street Car Wash decertification attempts come as RWDSU officials continue their efforts to install themselves at the Bessemer, AL, Amazon plant, despite the overwhelming employee vote against them. Litigation continues over whether RWDSU lawyers can nullify the Amazon workers’ vote in which barely 12% of eligible voters indicated support for the union bosses’ monopoly “representation.”
Seattle Hospital Workers Win Refunds of Union Dues Seized While They Had No Legal Obligation to Pay
Former top Labor Board prosecutor found SEIU’s confusing forms misled workers about rights during contract hiatus
Seattle, WA (December 7, 2021) – Eighteen hospital employees at Swedish Medical Center in Seattle together received thousands of dollars of union dues refunds, ending a legal case that challenged union officials’ failure to tell nonmember workers they were under no obligation to pay dues during a contract hiatus. Roger White, whose federal charges led to the refunds, was represented for free by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys.
In January 2020, White sent a letter to officials of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Healthcare 1199NW resigning his membership and invoking his right to pay reduced union fees under the Foundation-won Beck U.S. Supreme Court decision. Beck prevents workers from being charged for union activities unrelated to bargaining, like union boss political lobbying.
White filed an unfair labor practice charge at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in April 2020 after SEIU officials failed to inform him that during a recent contract hiatus, when no forced dues agreement was in place between the hospital and union officials, he and other nonmembers were under no obligation to pay union dues. Then-NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb agreed with White’s Foundation attorneys that union officials had unlawfully kept White in the dark about his rights during the contract lapse.
General Counsel Robb – who was later removed in an unprecedented action by President Biden minutes after taking office despite almost a year left on the General Counsel’s four year statutory term – also found that union officials used membership forms that were “confusing and ambiguous,” and did not provide enough information to allow an informed decision about union membership. The form signed by Swedish Medical Center employees that authorized SEIU officials to take dues from their paychecks “may be interpreted to preclude employees from revoking their authorization upon expiration of the contract,” Robb found.
The SEIU’s forms misled White and his coworkers about their rights. Though union bosses stopped charging White after his complaints, other nonmembers continued paying forced union dues even when they were not legally required to pay because union officials hadn’t given them an accurate picture of their rights.
Following the General Counsel’s ruling, the case returned to the NLRB Seattle Region, and a settlement was reached that required SEIU officials to pay back over $3200 of union dues they had seized from 18 current and former Swedish Medical Center employees who had resigned their union memberships but still paid dues during the contract hiatus. The settlement also requires union officials to inform nonmember Beck objectors that they have no obligation to pay union dues during any future contract hiatus.
“To maximize their forced dues revenues, SEIU bosses kept Roger White and his coworkers in a state of ignorance about their rights, and maintained that ignorance by drafting membership forms that misled the very workers the SEIU supposedly represents,” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “As nonmembers who wanted as little involvement with the SEIU as possible, it is outrageous that these workers were forced to pay any money just to be ‘represented’ by union bosses who didn’t respect them enough to fully inform them of their rights.”
“Cases like this, where General Counsel Robb sided with independent-minded workers whose rights were being violated by union bosses, are exactly the reason for President Biden’s unprecedented removal of Robb despite nearly 11 months remaining on his Senate-confirmed term,” added Mix. “Unfortunately given Biden’s partisan power grabs at the NLRB, if Roger White and his coworkers brought this case today, there is every reason to believe SEIU bosses would get away scot-free.”
Victory: CO Worker Wins Against Union Bosses Who Demanded Illegal $21,000 Fine
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, September/October 2021 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Union must back down after trying to punish worker who left union, found new job
Foundation staff ensured Russell Chacon’s frustrations with Sheet Metal union bosses’ illegal fines were covered by the Colorado Springs Gazette. Shortly after the article appeared, Sheet Metal union officials backed down from their demand.
COLORADO SPRINGS, CO – Colorado metal worker Russell Chacon was angry when he received a letter from International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers (SMART) Local 9 union officials in May, demanding he pay $21,252 in disciplinary fines. Six months earlier he had resigned his union membership, and had left his job at Colorado Sheet Metal to work for Rocky Mechanical, an employer that isn’t under the control of Sheet Metal union bosses.
Union officials demanded Chacon fork over the ruinous sum to cover an alleged union “loss of funds” for a period through May 31, which included days that Chacon had not even worked yet.
Sheet Metal Union Officials Violated Established Law to Harass Worker
Chacon obtained free legal representation from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys and filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the Sheet Metal union at National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 27 in Denver. He asserted that the fines were levied against him specifically in retaliation for his leaving the union and finding new work.
Soon after the Foundation-assisted charges, Sheet Metal union officials dropped the illegal fine demands, and are now forced by a settlement to inform workers that they will not subject them to internal union discipline if they exercise their right to end union membership.
Decades-old federal law prohibits union officials from forcing internal union discipline on workers who have resigned union membership, and from restricting the exercise of that basic right to refrain.
“If union officials were really concerned about us workers they would be happy I was able to get a better opportunity, even though it was at a facility that isn’t unionized,” Chacon told the Colorado Springs Gazette in May. “Instead they are violating my rights with this outrageous fine threat and harassment, just because I did what was best for me and my family.”
Although Sheet Metal union bosses informally rescinded their fine demands soon after Chacon filed his charge, NLRB Region 27 continued to investigate Chacon’s charge that union officials had instigated the discipline specifically in retaliation for his leaving the union.
Settlement Follows NLRB Finding Merit in Worker’s Charges of Retaliation
The NLRB found merit in Chacon’s claims of retaliation in July, forcing union officials to settle in order to avoid NLRB prosecution.
The settlement requires Sheet Metal union officials to post a notice at the union office stating that they “will not fail to inform or misinform you about the proper process for resigning your membership,” “will not fail to give effect to resignations of membership from the Union,” and “will not restrain and coerce you by instituting and prosecuting disciplinary proceedings and levying fines after failing to give effect to resignations.” The notice also confirms that Chacon is no longer subject to the fine demands.
“As the conclusion of this case shows, Sheet Metal union officials were caught red-handed violating workers’ most basic right to refrain from associating with an organization to which they don’t want to belong,” commented National Right to Work Foundation Vice President and Legal Director Raymond LaJeunesse. “Although we are pleased that Mr. Chacon is no longer saddled with an outrageous fine demand, unfortunately other Colorado workers can still be forced to pay dues to union bosses because The Centennial State lacks a Right to Work law.”
LaJeunesse continued, “Right to Work protections ensure that all union financial support is strictly voluntary, and that no worker can be fired just for refusal to pay dues to unwanted union bosses.”
Foundation Assists Workers in Kicking Out Unwanted Union Bosses
The following article is from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s bi-monthly Foundation Action Newsletter, September/October 2021 edition. To view other editions of Foundation Action or to sign up for a free subscription, click here.
Worker decertification efforts target SEIU, Teamsters union officials
Desert Springs “Decert”: Tammy Tarantino (third from left) and her fellow healthcare workers at Desert Springs Medical Center booted SEIU union bosses from their workplace with Foundation aid, voting by a 3-1 margin for decertification.
CHICAGO, IL – Workers in three different states recently waged successful campaigns to remove the union bosses who controlled their workplaces. In each instance workers utilized free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys to navigate the overly-complicated process for getting a vote to remove an unwanted union.
The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) — which is enforced by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) — gives workers the right to hold a decertification vote to end union officials’ monopoly bargaining power over workers. In theory, under the NLRA, workers who collect signatures from 30 percent of a workplace can hold a decertification vote at any time, provided there has not been a unionization vote there in the previous 12 months.
However, because of complicated NLRB doctrines compounded by union legal tactics, obtaining a vote to decertify a union can often be a challenge. That’s why workers in workplaces across the country turn to the Foundation for free legal aid as they seek to hold such a vote.
Workers’ ability to exercise their right to vote out an unwanted union is especially important in states without Right to Work protections, where union bosses can use their monopoly bargaining powers to force every worker to pay union dues or fees or else be fired.
But workers’ right to decertify a union is still critical in Right to Work states, because even without forced union payments, federal law gives union bosses the power to impose their so-called “representation” and resulting union monopoly contracts on members and non-members alike at unionized workplaces. Only once a union is decertified are workers free to represent themselves and communicate with their employer directly.
Foundation Helps Workers Navigate Tricky Legal Process
Highlighting recent activity, three separate workplaces have waged successful decertification efforts.
Petitioner Tim Mangia led the charge at Chicago’s Rush University Medical Center, where he and his fellow maintenance workers voted to remove Teamsters union bosses by a better than 3-1 margin. Separately, in Del Rio and Eagle Pass, Texas, salesmen for Frito-Lay also voted to free themselves from unwanted Teamsters union “representation” following free assistance from Foundation legal staff.
Meanwhile, Tammy Tarantino and her fellow technical employees at the Desert Springs Hospital Medical Center in Las Vegas successfully removed a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) local from their workplace with Foundation help.
Reforms: Union Bosses Can’t Use Bogus Charges to Block Decertification Elections
These cases proceeded without significant delays from union “blocking charges,” the often spurious charges against employers filed by union lawyers seeking to delay a decertification vote. Under old NLRB rules, such charges would have to be resolved before workers’ decertification votes could proceed, delaying the vote for months or even years.
Thanks to NLRB rulemaking advocated by the Foundation and backed by thousands of Foundation supporters, votes now virtually always proceed first with the results quickly announced, so that elections cannot be delayed nearly indefinitely by unsubstantiated union boss claims.
In the Las Vegas medical workers’ case, the new “blocking charge” rules allowed Tammy Tarantino continued from page 2 to have a vote, despite attempts by union lawyers to use charges against the hospital to delay the election. Without being able to rely on the “blocking charge” policy to maintain their power over the workplace, SEIU officials soon found themselves voted out with just 13 of 64 eligible voters voting for the union.
“While we look forward to the day when every individual worker has the freedom to decide whether to pay union dues or be represented by a union, it is especially egregious when union bosses are in power without even the support of a bare majority of rank-and-file workers,” said National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Patrick Semmens. “The National Right to Work Foundation is proud to help workers exercise their right to throw off the yoke of unwanted union so-called ‘representation.’”
Catholic Fort Campbell Employee Slams LIUNA Union Bosses with Federal Lawsuit for Illegal Religious Discrimination
Suit: In response to religious accommodation request, union officials kept demanding dues, sent ‘remedial church readings’ to employee, priest
Clarksville, TN (November 24, 2021) – J & J Worldwide Service employee Dorothy Frame, who works at Fort Campbell’s Blanchfield Army Community Hospital, is hitting Laborers’ International Union (LIUNA) officials at her workplace with a federal lawsuit for religious discrimination. She asserts that union officials are making her violate her Catholic religious beliefs by forcing her to fund the union’s activities through dues payments, despite her opposition to the union’s stance on abortion. Frame is receiving free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
According to her lawsuit, Frame in July 2019 “sent a letter informing [LIUNA] of the conflict between her religious beliefs and the requirement that she join or pay the Union.” Tennessee has a Right to Work law ensuring that private sector workers inside the state’s borders cannot be compelled to pay dues as a condition of employment. However, Fort Campbell is a “federal enclave” not subject to state law, and J & J management and LIUNA union bosses maintain a contract forcing employees to pay a portion of union dues to keep their jobs.
Frame’s July 2019 letter requested a religious accommodation, her lawsuit says, and included a message from her parish priest backing her position. Federal law prohibits unions from discriminating against employees on the basis of religion, and accommodations of religious objections to dues payment often consist of permitting a dissenting worker to instead contribute the dues amount to a charity.
“Ms. Frame believes that abortion is a grave sin,” her lawsuit details. “She believes joining or financially supporting the Unions would make her complicit in that sin because she believes that the Unions support and promote abortion. Thus, she believes that any money the Unions collect from her makes her complicit in sin and violates her religious beliefs.”
A response to Frame’s letter from a LIUNA lawyer came the following month, her lawsuit notes, criticizing her accommodation request and demanding that she “prove that her beliefs ‘[]meet the standard for a “legitimate justification.”’” The union lawyer also claimed that “Ms. Frame’s understanding of her faith was inferior to his own understanding of her faith” and even closed the letter by “sending Ms. Frame – and her priest – remedial church readings.” One of Frame’s attorneys sent a letter in September 2019 demonstrating how the accommodation request conformed to various church teachings, but nonetheless LIUNA bosses continued to take dues from Frame’s paycheck until November 2019.
Frame filed a discrimination charge against LIUNA with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in December 2019. Even after EEOC proceedings and additional letters from her attorney demonstrating the union’s various forms of support for abortion, Frame’s lawsuit explains, union officials still refused to accommodate her beliefs. LIUNA bosses also “refuse to return any money they collected from Ms. Frame” after she had requested an accommodation.
Frame’s attorneys have now taken the fight to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The suit charges LIUNA with religious discrimination for its officials’ “refusing to accommodate her religious beliefs” and “deducting money from her pay when they knew that doing so would violate her religious beliefs.” The complaint also charges LIUNA with quid pro quo religious harassment for telling Frame “she must pay the Unions money and violate her religious beliefs,” or be fired.
Frame’s lawsuit asks that the court declare “she has the right to a religious accommodation that alleviates her obligation to join or support the Unions” and that LIUNA return all money they seized from her wages in violation of her religious beliefs, plus pay “damages for emotional pain, suffering, and mental anguish that she suffered because the Unions repeatedly challenged and disparaged her religious beliefs.”
“LIUNA officials have put their arrogance and callousness on full display by forcing Ms. Frame to choose between losing her job and severely compromising her religious beliefs,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Denying an individual a simple religious accommodation is a clear violation of federal law, and Foundation attorneys will fight for Ms. Frame until she gets one.”
“However, Big Labor’s government-granted privilege to force fees out of workers as a job condition allowed this kind of abuse to happen – no American worker should be forced to subsidize unwanted union activities just to keep his or her job,” Mix added.
West Virginia Supreme Court Reverses Injunction, Restores Protections against Unconstitutional Union Dues Seizures
Supreme Court protects workers’ First Amendment rights, overturns lower court injunction against Paycheck Protection Act
Charleston, WV (November 23, 2021) – In a 3-2 decision, West Virginia’s Supreme Court reversed a preliminary injunction issued by a Kanawha County Circuit Court judge against West Virginia’s Paycheck Protection Act. In September, attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable nonprofit dedicated to protecting workers’ legal rights from compulsory unionism, filed an amicus brief urging the Court to reverse the injunction, which union bosses obtained as they challenged the new law in Court.
Foundation staff attorneys argued that the Paycheck Protection Act is not only valid, but essential to protect West Virginia public sector workers’ rights under the Foundation-won 2018 Janus v. AFSCME U.S. Supreme Court decision. To ensure compliance with Janus the Paycheck Protection Act prohibits the government from automatically deducting union dues or fees from public employees’ paychecks, leaving voluntary union members free to make their own arrangements for payment of union dues if they want.
“The Act prevents the government from unwittingly violating their employees’ First Amendment rights by seizing union dues from them without their voluntary, affirmative consent and knowing, intelligent waiver of those rights, as required under Janus,” the Foundation’s brief reads. “The State’s protection of its employees’ First Amendment rights does not violate the constitutional rights of Respondents West Virginia AFL-CIO, et. al. (‘the Unions’), because the Unions have no constitutional entitlement to employees’ money or to the employer’s administration of union dues deduction schemes.”
The Supreme Court’s Janus v AFSCME ruling made union dues for public sector workers completely voluntary. The Court held that no union dues or fees can be taken from a public worker’s wages without a knowing and intelligent waiver of that employee’s First Amendment right not to pay, and that such a waiver “cannot be presumed.” The decision reasoned that, because all public sector union activities involve lobbying the government, forcing public sector workers to pay any money to a union amounts to forced political speech forbidden by the First Amendment.
In the amicus brief Foundation attorneys argued the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals should overturn the preliminary injunction, because West Virginia has a legitimate interest in protecting its employees’ First Amendment rights, and because union officials’ lawsuit against the Paycheck Protection Act has no chance of success on the merits. Yesterday’s decision agreed with those arguments, citing Janus, and reversed the injunction as Foundation attorneys had advocated.
This is not the first time the Foundation has defended state policies designed to protect public employees’ First Amendment Janus rights. Last year, Foundation staff attorneys filed detailed comments backing a Michigan Civil Service Commission (MiCSC) policy that required public employers to obtain annual consent from their workers before taking union payments out of their wages. Officials from the United Auto Workers (UAW) and other unions ultimately abandoned a lawsuit contesting the rule in October 2020.
Foundation staff attorneys also filed 10 legal briefs defending West Virginia’s Right to Work law, which was the target of a legal attack by union officials from 2016 until last year. Among the Foundation’s filings were amicus briefs for Reginald Gibbs, who worked as a lead slot machine technician with the Greenbrier Hotel in White Sulphur Springs, WV, and Donna Harper, who worked as a laundry aide and nursing assistant at the Genesis HealthCare Tygart Center in Fairmont, WV. Both workers opposed paying money to the union bosses in power at their workplaces and supported the protections the West Virginia Right to Work law afforded them.
“West Virginia’s Paycheck Protection law properly takes the government out of the union dues collection business, and in the process helps ensure that no union payments are taken from public employees in violation of their First Amendment rights recognized in Janus,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The Supreme Court of Appeals made the right decision by reversing the Circuit Court’s injunction which was issued under the outrageous premise that union bosses have a legal right to use taxpayer-funded government payroll systems to divert workers’ money into union coffers.”
Houston MDS Boring Workers Unanimously Vote to Oust IUOE Union Bosses from Their Workplace
Employees vote 13-0 to remove unwanted union officials
Houston, TX (November 19, 2021) – Today, according to a tally of votes announced by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), workers at MDS Boring in Houston voted to remove unwanted International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) officials from their workplace. Seth Patrick, an MDS Boring employee, petitioned the NLRB so he and his coworkers could vote to remove the union. He filed his petition with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, and collected signatures from enough of his coworkers to trigger an NLRB-conducted decertification election.
Ballots were mailed to eligible employees on October 22, and on November 19, the NLRB tallied the results. Workers voted unanimously 13-0 to remove IUOE Local 450 officials from their workplace.
Decertification is a difficult process under the NLRB’s rules, and union officials often attempt to delay worker decertification efforts through litigation. IUOE officials have filed unfair labor practice charges against the company to delay certification of the election results.
However, thanks to Foundation-backed “blocking charge” reforms adopted by the NLRB in 2020, elections themselves cannot be delayed by union litigation. Previously, union officials could block decertification votes almost at whim by filing unfair labor practice charges against employers without even proving the employer’s actions had affected workers’ desire to oust the union. The new rules established by the Trump NLRB limit such delays, and MDS Boring’s employees were able to decisively vote against IUOE bosses soon after filing their petition.
“Thanks to Texas’s Right to Work law, workers at MDS Boring couldn’t be forced to pay union dues, but they were still forced to accept union bosses’ so-called ‘representation’ at the bargaining table,” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “The Foundation is proud to help Seth Patrick and his coworkers assert their independence. It is unfortunate, but not unexpected, that IUOE bosses are now using litigation to block the outcome unanimously favored by the workers they claim to represent.”
UPTE Union Bosses Back Down, Settle UC Irvine Lab Assistant’s Lawsuit Battling Unconstitutional Dues Seizures from Wages
Settlement requires union officials to refund all unconstitutionally taken money
Irvine, CA (November 17, 2021) – University of California Irvine lab assistant Amber Walker has won a settlement forcing University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE) union officials at her workplace to stop illegally taking dues money from her paycheck. The victory comes after Walker sought free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys and hit UPTE officials with a civil rights lawsuit, asserting they had violated her First Amendment right to abstain from financially supporting an unwanted union.
Walker’s lawsuit enforced her rights under the 2018 Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision. It challenged both the university’s seizure of funds from her paycheck at the union’s behest, and a university policy allowing union officials to impose a photo ID requirement limiting the right of public employees to cut off dues payments to the union. A California statute that makes public employers completely subservient to union officials on dues issues, her lawsuit argued, resulted in both due process and First Amendment violations that occurred due to UPTE officials’ photo ID requirement.
In the landmark Janus decision, the justices declared that forcing public sector workers to fund unions as a condition of employment violates the First Amendment. The justices also ruled that union dues can only be taken from a public employee with an affirmative and knowing waiver of that employee’s First Amendment right not to pay.
Walker’s lawsuit explained that she sent UPTE union bosses a letter in June 2021 exercising her right to end her union membership and all union dues deductions from her wages. Although Walker submitted this message within a short union-created “escape period” that was imposed to limit when workers can revoke dues deductions, they still rebuffed her request, telling her she needed to mail them a copy of a photo ID to effectuate her revocation. The photo ID requirement, clearly adopted to frustrate workers’ attempts to exercise their constitutional rights, is mentioned nowhere on the dues deduction card Walker had previously signed to initiate dues payments.
By the time UPTE officials had informed Walker that her request to cut off dues was rejected for lack of photo ID, the “window period” enforced by union officials had already elapsed. Had Walker not filed a lawsuit with free Foundation legal aid, UPTE officials likely would have continued siphoning money from her paycheck for another year until the arrival of the next “window period.”
Rather than face Foundation staff attorneys in court, UPTE bosses backed down and chose to settle the lawsuit. The settlement requires UPTE officials to immediately stop taking money from Walker’s paycheck and to refund any deductions they took after her initial attempt to exercise her Janus rights. They must also desist from enforcing the photo ID requirement.
The Foundation is aiding other public sector workers across the country in defending their First Amendment right to refuse union financial support. In October, Foundation staff attorneys filed two joint petitions urging the Supreme Court to take cases brought for Alaska, Oregon, and California public servants who are battling restrictive “window period” schemes union bosses manipulated to stop them from opting out of supporting unwanted union activities.
“We at the Foundation are glad to have helped Ms. Walker reclaim dues that were illegally siphoned from her wages by UPTE union bosses, but hardworking public servants like Ms. Walker should not be forced to file federal lawsuits just to exercise their basic First Amendment rights of free association,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The fact that UPTE bosses backed so quickly off defending their own suspect behavior likely indicates that they knew their schemes would not stand up to any serious constitutional scrutiny.”
