Volkswagen Workers File Motion to Defend Against UAW Union Boss NLRB Election Objections

UAW union bosses lost secret-ballot unionization election, but Volkswagen appears unwilling to defend workers’ rejection of the UAW

Washington, DC (February 25, 2014) – Five Chattanooga, Tennessee Volkswagen workers have filed a motion to intervene after the United Auto Workers (UAW) union filed objections to an election in which workers at VW’s Chattanooga facility voted against unionization.

The five workers filed the motion to intervene with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

Late last week, UAW union officials filed the objections with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after Chattanooga VW workers voted against giving the UAW union hierarchy monopoly bargaining control over the plant via a rapid-fire unionization election.

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (February 25, 2014) – Five Chattanooga, Tennessee Volkswagen workers have filed a motion to intervene after the United Auto Workers (UAW) union filed objections to an election in which workers at VW’s Chattanooga facility voted against unionization.

The five workers filed the motion to intervene with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

Late last week, UAW union officials filed the objections with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after Chattanooga VW workers voted against giving the UAW union hierarchy monopoly bargaining control over the plant via a rapid-fire unionization election.

Foundation staff attorneys earlier helped several VW workers file charges citing improprieties in the UAW’s unionization campaign, including getting workers to sign union authorization cards by coercion and misrepresentation and using cards signed too long ago to be legally valid. Some of those workers also filed a federal charge against the company after German VW officials made comments linking unionization to more production for the facility.

Just days after the NLRB dismissed the workers’ charges, the NLRB approved a rapid-fire unionization election. On January 27, VW and the UAW struck a backroom “neutrality” deal that called for the election after just nine days, provided UAW union operatives with nearly unfettered access to the facility, paid workers to attend pro-UAW captive audience meetings, and required company management to “align” their public statements with union officials.

“Based on Volkswagen management’s actions leading up to this point, these workers are concerned that VW will not actively defend their vote to remain free from union boss control,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “That’s why these workers have filed a motion to intervene with the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.”

Mix continued: “The NLRB should immediately grant the employees’ motion to intervene in the election certification process to ensure that one party to the process is fully invested in upholding the election results. Otherwise, UAW officials with the approval of VW and a pro-union NLRB will be able to continually throw out election results until they get the result they want.”

Washington, DC (February 21, 2014) – United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials have filed objections with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to the results of a unionization election in which workers at Volkswagen America’s Chattanooga, Tennessee facility voted against giving the UAW union hierarchy monopoly bargaining control over the plant. Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement in response to the UAW’s objections:

“Chattanooga VW employees managed to stave off a coercive unionization campaign even though the UAW and VW officials colluded for over two years to stack the deck against the workers. The result of this election came after the NLRB further tilted the playing field in favor of UAW union officials by fast-tracking the unionization process. Despite all of this, UAW union officials still lost the vote.

“Now, UAW union officials are blaming everyone but themselves for swaying the vote against the union, while neglecting the fact that members of VW Germany management threatened workers to unionize or miss out on more work. Even President Obama weighed in with support for unionization. Obviously, the UAW’s complaints about ‘outside influences’ only apply to those that oppose the UAW.

“In the past, the NLRB has refused to uphold employer objections to unionization elections in which politicians acting at the behest of the UAW seemingly swayed the vote’s outcome in favor of the union. Foundation staff attorneys plan to exercise every legal option for workers who support the election’s result, because they are concerned that Volkswagen will not actively defend the employees’ vote.”

Washington, DC (February 14, 2014) – Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement after the announcement today that a majority of workers voting at Volkswagen America’s Chattanooga, Tennessee facility voted against giving the United Auto Workers (UAW) union hierarchy monopoly bargaining control over the plant via a rapid-fire unionization election:

“Chattanooga VW employees managed to stave off a coercive unionization campaign even though the UAW and Volkswagen’s German management colluded for over two years to stack the deck against the workers. Volkswagen Germany board members wanted UAW union officials to gain monopoly bargaining powers over the Chattanooga facility so that they don’t have to compete with nonunion VW workers in America.

“The result of this election comes after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) unprecedentedly fast-tracked the unionization process, further tilting the playing field in favor of UAW union officials. It also demonstrates once again the unreliability of union officials’ ‘card check’ method of unionization, as the UAW continued to claim on the basis of cards that it had the support of a majority of Volkswagen team members and that no election was needed.

“Despite all of this, UAW union officials’ still lost the vote. If UAW union officials cannot win when the odds are so stacked in their favor, perhaps they should reevaluate the product they are selling to workers.”

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys helped several VW workers file charges citing improprieties in the UAW union hierarchy’s unionization campaign, including getting workers to sign union authorization cards by coercion and misrepresentation and using cards signed too long ago to be legally valid. Some of those workers also filed a federal charge against the company stating that comments made by German VW officials illegally intimidated their fellow workers into accepting UAW monopoly bargaining power over their workplace.

After the NLRB dismissed those charges, Foundation attorneys asked the NLRB’s Inspector General to investigate the agency’s conduct during its processing of the workers’ unfair labor practice charges. Foundation attorneys received evidence that the agency’s actions undermined their ability to advise their clients before the dismissal of their cases became publicly known.

Just days after the NLRB dispatched the workers’ charges, the NLRB approved a rapid-fire unionization election. John Raudabaugh, a law professor and former NLRB member, was quoted by the media as saying, “I have never seen such a quick election.”

Foundation attorneys also filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the NLRB seeking full disclosure regarding the agency’s handling of the case and its contacts with UAW agents.

Today, an article on RealClearMarkets raises more questions regarding the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) conduct in the United Autoworker (UAW) union boss push to gain monopoly power over Volkswagen workers in Chattanooga, Tennessee:

What is unusual about this election for United Auto Workers representation?…

The speedy election was coordinated with the National Labor Relations Board, which was unusually cooperative in approving the election petition. Although the election was only nine days away, the board immediately agreed to set up an election during a three-day period. The NLRB must organize and supervise the election, and count the ballots. How odd that on February 3 the Board had time available from February 12 to 14 to do this, a big favor for the United Auto Workers.

Former NLRB board member John N. Raudabaugh, now a law professor, told me, "I have never seen such a quick election."

As you may recall, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys are assisting several workers who challenged the UAW’s and VW’s coercive unionization tactics at the Chattanooga VW facility. After a three month investigation, the NLRB’s Division of Advice issued two memos instructing the NLRB Regional Director in Atlanta to dismiss the workers’ charges.

Moreover, NLRB staff in Washington, DC, hurriedly released the Division’s instructions to members of the press and did not release the memos to the workers’ Foundation staff attorneys.

A leaked email shows that the Regional Director in Atlanta questioned the propriety of the memos’ release to the media, contrary to longstanding NLRB practice.

Foundation attorneys are concerned that the NLRB’s hurried public release of memos favorable to VW and the UAW right before a high-profile election, and its approval of a quick-snap election within hours of VW requesting one, calls into question the agency’s impartiality in the workers’ cases.

Foundation staff attorneys have requested an official inquiry into the NLRB’s conduct in the case, and also filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the NLRB seeking full disclosure regarding the agency’s handling of the case and its contacts with UAW agents.

The NLRB’s actions in this case continue to raise questions about its impartiality going forward.

Hollywood, FL (February 11, 2014) – Following a prolonged legal battle, a local casino worker has successfully fought off a backroom union organizing deal with help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys. Martin Mulhall withdrew his lawsuit, which went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, after union lawyers ceased their efforts to enforce the agreement Mulhall was challenging.

Mulhall was contesting a union organizing pact struck in 2004 between UNITE HERE Local 355 officials and Mardi Gras Gaming. Under the deal, union officials promised to spend over one hundred thousand dollars on a gambling ballot initiative and guaranteed not to picket, boycott, or strike against Mardi Gras facilities.

In return, union organizers asked Mardi Gras to give them employees’ personal contact information (including home addresses) and grant access to company facilities during a coercive “card check” organizing campaign, refrain from informing workers about the downsides of unionization, and not request a federally-supervised secret ballot election to determine whether employees unionized.

Mulhall filed a lawsuit challenging the organizing pact in 2008, alleging that the company’s concessions were of substantial monetary value because they made UNITE HERE’s organizing drive easier and less expensive. Under the Labor Management Relations Act, employers are prohibited from handing over “any money or other thing of value” to union organizers, a provision that is supposed to prevent union officials from selling out workers’ rights in exchange for corporate concessions.

In December, the U.S. Supreme Court “dismissed as improvidently granted” a union appeal of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in Mulhall v. UNITE HERE. The dismissal leaves intact the appeals court’s ruling that the company’s organizing assistance to union officials could constitute “thing[s] of value” under the Labor Management Relations Act. After the Court dismissed the union’s appeal, UNITE HERE finally abandoned its effort to enforce the organizing pact.

“Management shouldn’t be allowed to turn over employees’ personal information to aggressive Big Labor organizers as a negotiating tactic, which is why the Eleventh Circuit’s precedent is a vital protection for independent-minded workers,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Thanks to Mr. Mulhall’s victory, union bosses and employers who use workers’ rights as a bargaining chip will now enter into these agreements at their own risk.”

Worker Advocate Reacts to Volkswagen’s Request for NLRB Union Election

Unionization election reportedly scheduled for February 12

Washington, DC (February 3, 2014) – Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement after the announcement today that Volkswagen America has petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a rapid-fire United Auto Workers (UAW) unionization election in its Chattanooga plant:

“We’re pleased that despite constant calls by UAW officials to be recognized as the workers’ monopoly bargaining representative via card check recognition, Volkswagen workers will instead be given a chance to vote on the matter in a secret-ballot election. A secret-ballot election is what Foundation-assisted workers were asking for all along.

“However, we are concerned about the existence of backroom deals cut between Volkswagen and UAW officials giving union organizers preferential access to the workers leading up to the election. We call on VW to give workers opposing the union equal access and also to release any agreements it has signed regarding what would happen if the UAW union takes monopoly bargaining power over the workplace, including agreements to impose a so-called works council on the employees.

“VW workers should be given all the facts before the election so that they can make an informed choice, and we will oppose efforts to stampede them or tilt the playing field.”

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (February 3, 2014) – Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement after the announcement today that Volkswagen America has petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a rapid-fire United Auto Workers (UAW) unionization election in its Chattanooga plant:

“We’re pleased that despite constant calls by UAW officials to be recognized as the workers’ monopoly bargaining representative via card check recognition, Volkswagen workers will instead be given a chance to vote on the matter in a secret-ballot election. A secret-ballot election is what Foundation-assisted workers were asking for all along.

“However, we are concerned about the existence of backroom deals cut between Volkswagen and UAW officials giving union organizers preferential access to the workers leading up to the election. We call on VW to give workers opposing the union equal access and also to release any agreements it has signed regarding what would happen if the UAW union takes monopoly bargaining power over the workplace, including agreements to impose a so-called works council on the employees.

“VW workers should be given all the facts before the election so that they can make an informed choice, and we will oppose efforts to stampede them or tilt the playing field.”

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys assisted several VW workers in filing charges alleging improprieties in the UAW union hierarchy’s card check process, including getting workers to sign union authorization cards by coercion and misrepresentation and using cards signed too long ago to be legally valid. Some of those workers also filed a federal charge against the company alleging that statements by German VW officials are illegally intimidating their fellow workers to accept UAW monopoly bargaining power over their workplace.

After the NLRB Division of Advice instructed the NLRB Regional Director in Atlanta to dismiss those charges, Foundation attorneys, led by former NLRB Member John Raudabaugh, asked the NLRB’s Inspector General to investigate the agency’s conduct during its processing of the workers’ unfair labor practice charges because Foundation attorneys received evidence that the agency’s actions undermined their ability to advise their clients before the dismissal of their cases became publicly known.

Foundation attorneys also filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the NLRB seeking full disclosure regarding the agency’s handling of the case and its contacts with UAW agents.

Sacramento, CA (February 3, 2014) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, eighteen California civil servants have filed a class action lawsuit in U. S. District Court against the SEIU Local 1000 union. The lawsuit challenges the union’s policy of requiring nonunion employees to affirmatively object to paying for union politics and asks that the SEIU seek employees’ permission before deducting union dues for political activism.

The lawsuit builds on a landmark, Foundation-won Supreme Court decision from 2012. In Knox v. SEIU Local 1000, the Supreme Court held for the first time that a union should not have collected dues for a political spending campaign without nonmembers’ affirmative consent.

Although nonunion civil servants have the right to opt out of paying union dues for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activism, many unions require employees to object to those payments before they’ll cease collecting full union dues. The lawsuit seeks to shift that burden from employees, whose paychecks and rights are at stake, to union officials, who would then be required to seek nonmembers’ permission before collecting full dues.

The lawsuit notes that SEIU 1000’s current policy – which requires nonunion public employees to object to union political spending – effectively rigs the game the union’s favor. Although nonunion employees are supposed to receive notices informing them of their rights to opt out of paying for union politics, several of the plaintiffs never received such notices. Others were only notified after a union-designated window period for objecting to the payment of full dues had already expired.

Nonunion civil servants who did receive the notice in a timely fashion found that it downplayed employees’ right to opt out. Information about refraining from paying dues for union politics was printed in small text and featured below the union’s more prominent pitch for full membership.

If any employees received the notice in a timely fashion and were able to decipher the union’s explanation of their right to refrain from paying full union dues, they then had to undergo an onerous, bureaucratic process to assert that right.

“Nonunion civil servants shouldn’t have to navigate a cumbersome opt-out procedure to assert their right to refrain from union politics,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “We hope the courts recognize the importance of protecting independent-minded employees by requiring union officials to get their consent before deducting dues for political activism.”

Local Transit Worker Wins Federal Settlement After Union Officials Misled and Ignored Worker to Pocket Extra Union Dues

Union officials refused to acknowledge worker’s request to exercise right to refrain from union dues payments

Mesa, AZ (January 30, 2014) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a local transit worker has won a federal settlement after union officials violated his right to refrain from paying union dues or fees.

David Azbell worked as a bus driver for Veolia Transportation and then for First Transit, which took over Veolia Transportation’s contract with the city. In June 2013, Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1433 union officials were considering calling a strike against the new company to pressure company management into entering a monopoly bargaining agreement with the union.

Unsatisfied with the ATU Local 1433 union officials’ so-called “representation,” Azbell hand-delivered a letter to a union official stating that under Arizona’s Right to Work law he was resigning his union membership and refraining from paying union dues. When Azbell submitted his letter of resignation, the union official told him that the union hierarchy would still continue to take union dues from his paychecks.

Click here to read the full release.