Local Bus Drivers Overwhelmingly Vote to Remove Union

Workers vote to remove unwanted Amalgamated Transit Union from their workplace

Monroeville, PA (July 8, 2014) – Gateway School District bus drivers have overwhelmingly voted to remove a local union from their workplace.

The school bus drivers were finally allowed to vote to remove the union from their workplace after driver Robert Williams, who received free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, and his coworkers petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a secret-ballot election four times.

Click here to read the full release.

Monroeville, PA (July 8, 2014) – Gateway School District bus drivers have overwhelmingly voted to remove a local union from their workplace.

The school bus drivers were finally allowed to vote to remove the union from their workplace after driver Robert Williams, who received free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, and his coworkers petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a secret-ballot election four times.

In July of last year, Student Transportation of America, Inc. took over bus services at the Gateway School District. Student Transportation of America then recognized Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1729 union officials as the drivers’ monopoly bargaining representative after a majority of their workforce was hired from the previous, unionized student transportation contractor.

After eight months of failed negotiations between the company and union, 102 of the roughly 105 bus drivers signed the fourth petition they filed with the NLRB asking for a secret-ballot election to determine whether or not to keep the union as their exclusive representative. ATU union officials moved to block the workers’ petition, arguing that not enough time had passed for the workers to request an election. On May 8, an evidentiary hearing was held in Pittsburgh, at which Williams was represented by Foundation attorneys. The NLRB last month decided to allow the election to proceed.

On June 27, 87 percent of the bus drivers casting ballots voted to remove the unwanted union from their workplace.

“It is easy to see why Transit Union bosses repeatedly blocked these bus drivers’ requests for a secret-ballot election to determine their union representation,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “As a result of the decertification victory, these bus drivers will now be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment, and be rewarded on their individual merit.”

After Eight Year Legal Fight, Teamsters Finally Agree to Pay $51,500 Judgment to Victim of Illegal Union Discrimination

Teamster union bosses sought to punish worker for refraining from union membership

Tulsa, OK (July 8, 2014) – After years of stonewalling and legal wrangling, a local Teamster union has finally agreed to pay a former Interstate Bakeries Wonder Bread/Hostess delivery driver $51,500 in damages and interest for discriminating against the worker.

Oklahoma worker Kirk Rammage has received free assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys during his eight year legal battle challenging the local Teamster union’s discriminatory policy.

Rammage was the single nonunion sales representative with a Dolly Madison facility in Ponca City for over 15 years before his division was merged in 2005 with Wonder Bread/Hostess. Although the company initially wanted to protect Rammage’s seniority during the merger, Teamster Local 523 union officials insisted that Rammage be put at the bottom of the seniority roster despite his longer workplace tenure. The company later complied with the union bosses’ demand.

Click here to read the full release.

Tulsa, OK (July 8, 2014) – After years of stonewalling and legal wrangling, a local Teamster union has finally agreed to pay a former Interstate Bakeries Wonder Bread/Hostess delivery driver $51,500 in damages and interest for discriminating against the worker.

Oklahoma worker Kirk Rammage has received free assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys during his eight year legal battle challenging the local Teamster union’s discriminatory policy.

Rammage was the single nonunion sales representative with a Dolly Madison facility in Ponca City for over 15 years before his division was merged in 2005 with Wonder Bread/Hostess. Although the company initially wanted to protect Rammage’s seniority during the merger, Teamster Local 523 union officials insisted that Rammage be put at the bottom of the seniority roster despite his longer workplace tenure. The company later complied with the union bosses’ demand.

By insisting that Rammage lose his seniority, Teamster officials effectively discriminated against him based on his union membership. As a result, Rammage was forced to commute to a new work location more than 70 miles away.

After Rammage filed federal charges against the union, the NLRB ruled against the discriminatory Teamster-imposed policy. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld the NLRB’s decision on an appeal filed by Teamster union lawyers. Those rulings were later nullified by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2009 on the ground that the Board lacked a three-member quorum at the time of its decision.

The case then went back to the NLRB. The NLRB revisited the facts of the case and again concluded that union officials broke the law. The Tenth Circuit upheld the NLRB ruling again and slapped Teamster Local 523 with monetary sanctions for the frivolous nature of the union’s lawyers’ second appeal. Teamster union lawyers appealed the case to the Supreme Court again, but the Court declined to take the case.

The case then went before an NLRB Administrative Law Judge to determine the amount of back pay and damages the union owes Rammage. The judge ruled that Rammage was entitled to $47,337 in back pay and reimbursements, plus interest. After union lawyers filed objections, a three-member panel of the NLRB ruled once again in favor of Rammage.

The union has now agreed to pay damages and interest totaling $51,500, starting with an initial payment of $10,000 by July 10.

“Justice delayed is justice denied and Mr. Rammage has been denied justice for far too long,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “After multiple hearings and trials, and two appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court, we are glad that Mr. Rammage will finally receive compensation.”

Springfield, VA (July 3, 2014) – In the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark Harris v. Quinn ruling, the National Right to Work Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal assistance to employees, has announced an offer of free legal aid to homecare and childcare providers across the country who are subject to forced unionization.

Harris, which was argued by Foundation staff attorneys for eight Illinois care providers, struck down a scheme pushed by former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich and current Illinois Governor Pat Quinn that forced providers to pay union dues. The Supreme Court ruled that forcing Illinois caregivers, whose charges receive a small state subsidy, to pay union dues violates their First Amendment rights.

Homecare and/or childcare unionization schemes have been established in at least 18 other states. Foundation staff attorneys are currently assisting homecare or childcare providers in Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Michigan who wish to refrain from joining or financially supporting unwanted unions.

Foundation litigators believe that the Harris precedent can be used to challenge homecare and childcare unionization schemes nationwide. To that end, the National Right to Work Foundation has announced an offer of free legal assistance to caregivers who oppose compulsory union dues.

“After examining the Harris decision, our staff attorneys have concluded that the Supreme Court’s ruling can be used to challenge coercive homecare unionization schemes in states across the country,” said Ray LaJeunesse, Vice President and Legal Director of the National Right to Work Foundation.

“No personal caregiver should be forced to pay union dues, which is why we’re extending an offer of free legal assistance to homecare and childcare providers everywhere,” continued LaJeunesse. “We hope to leverage the Harris decision to end the specter of homecare unionization and protect providers’ First Amendment rights nationwide.”

Homecare and childcare providers subjected to forced unionization schemes can request free legal assistance from Foundation staff attorneys by visiting the Foundation’s website at www.nrtw.org or calling the Foundation’s toll-free hotline at 1-800-336-3600. Each request for assistance will be evaluated on its merits based on the facts and the characteristics of the specific unionization scheme, among other things.

Supreme Court Clears Path for Michigan Childcare Providers to Win Back Money Illegally Seized by Union Officials

UAW and AFSCME took in over $4 million from 50,000 childcare providers in unconstitutional scheme, but lower courts blocked lawsuit to return money from unions

Washington, DC (July 1, 2014) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it has granted, vacated, and remanded a federal lawsuit which seeks to require that Michigan’s 50,000 home childcare providers receive a refund of union dues illegally taken during a now-defunct unionization scheme.

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys argue that all of Michigan’s home childcare providers should be entitled to refunds of the union dues collected after former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and a UAW and AFSCME coalition, the Child Care Providers Together Michigan (CCPTM) union, colluded to force the state’s providers into union ranks against their will.

Michigan home childcare providers Carrie Schlaud, Diana Orr, Peggy Mashke, and Edward and Nora Gross originally filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Granholm and the CCPTM union for designating home childcare providers who receive state funds as public employees solely for the purpose of forcing them to accept the CCPTM’s “representation” and pay union dues.

Click here to read the full release.

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Illinois Homecare Provider Unionization Scheme

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys defend home-based personal care providers forced into union ranks

Washington, DC (June 30, 2014) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in a case over whether Illinois homecare providers can be forced into union ranks against their will.

The case, Harris v. Quinn, is a class-action lawsuit argued by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys and filed by Pam Harris and seven other Illinois care providers after Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed an executive order rendering them vulnerable to unwanted union organizing.

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (July 1, 2014) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it has granted, vacated, and remanded a federal lawsuit which seeks to require that Michigan’s 50,000 home childcare providers receive a refund of union dues illegally taken during a now-defunct unionization scheme.

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys argue that all of Michigan’s home childcare providers should be entitled to refunds of the union dues collected after former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and a UAW and AFSCME coalition, the Child Care Providers Together Michigan (CCPTM) union, colluded to force the state’s providers into union ranks against their will.

Michigan home childcare providers Carrie Schlaud, Diana Orr, Peggy Mashke, and Edward and Nora Gross originally filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Granholm and the CCPTM union for designating home childcare providers who receive state funds as public employees solely for the purpose of forcing them to accept the CCPTM’s “representation” and pay union dues.

Although less than 15 percent of 40,000 childcare providers then receiving state funding voted in a union certification election, CCPTM union bosses were subsequently granted monopoly lobbying privileges and the power to collect union dues from home childcare providers. The union took upwards of $4 million dollars from the childcare providers before the scheme ended.

After filing their lawsuit, the five plaintiffs won a settlement with Governor Rick Snyder ensuring that Michigan no longer forces home childcare providers into union ranks. However, because the providers’ lawsuit was denied class-action status, CCPTM union officials were not required to refund $4 million in forced union dues previously collected from over 50,000 other care providers.

Citing yesterday’s Foundation-won Harris decision – in which the Court held that homecare providers cannot be forced into union dues payments – the Court overturned the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ decision in the case and ordered that court to reconsider its denial of class-action status to the thousands of childcare providers.

“Union operatives used their political clout to collect forced dues from thousands of unwilling Michigan home childcare providers,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “All of those childcare providers deserve to get their money back, and the U.S. Supreme Court appears to agree.”

Washington, DC (June 30, 2014) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in a case over whether Illinois homecare providers can be forced into union ranks against their will.

The case, Harris v. Quinn, is a class-action lawsuit argued by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys and filed by Pam Harris and seven other Illinois care providers after Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed an executive order rendering them vulnerable to unwanted union organizing.

Quinn’s executive order mirrored one issued by disgraced former Governor Rod Blagojevich, which designated over 20,000 personal care providers as “public employees” solely for the purpose of forcing them into union ranks. Quinn then expanded Blagojevich’s directive to cover an additional 4,500 providers who were not included in the original order. The scheme only designated providers as public employees for the purposes of unionization, leaving the homecare recipients as the employers for all other aspects of the providers’ work.

The Court’s ruling struck down the scheme, ruling that individuals who indirectly receive state subsidies based on their clientele cannot be forced to pay compulsory union fees. The Court’s ruling renders unconstitutional similar homecare unionization schemes attempted in at least 18 other states.

For example, a federal lawsuit brought by Minnesota childcare providers subject to a similar scheme has been held pending the outcome of the Harris case.

“This scheme, which forced parents and other relatives taking care of persons with disabilities into union political association was a slap in the face of fundamental American principles we hold dear,” stated Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “We applaud these homecare providers’ effort to convince the Supreme Court to strike down this constitutionally-dubious scheme, thus freeing thousands of homecare providers from unwanted union control.”

“We celebrate knowing that Illinois moms linked arms and refused to be bullied,” stated lead plaintiff Pam Harris. “Families in Illinois can relax knowing their homes are safe from being a union workplace and there will be no third party intruding into the care we provide our disabled sons and daughters.”

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Obama Labor Board Recess Appointments

Right to Work Foundation attorneys argued Obama’s purported recess appointments were invalid because Senate was not in recess

Washington, DC (June 26, 2014) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down President Barack Obama’s controversial purported “recess appointments” to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, Noel Canning v. NLRB. The brief was filed for the Foundation and Jeanette Geary, a worker who is receiving free legal assistance from Foundation staff attorneys in a case pending before the Board, which had been decided in part by the faux Board. Foundation staff attorneys had challenged the recess appointments in nearly a dozen other pending NLRB cases.

Click here to read the full release.