19 Dec 2022

Spanish Broadcasting System Radio Host Appeals Case After Labor Board Blocks Vote to Remove SAG-AFTRA Union Officials

Posted in News Releases

Request for Review: In vote to remove union, NLRB Regional Director ordered employee ballots destroyed and never counted

Los Angeles, CA (December 19, 2022) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Spanish Broadcasting System radio host Adal Loreto is defending his and his coworkers’ right to vote unwanted Stage Actors’ Guild (SAG-AFTRA) union officials out of their workplace. In July, Loreto filed a petition for a group of his coworkers seeking a vote to end union officials’ so-called “representation” over on-air talent of KLAX­FM and KXOL-FM radio stations.

That National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decertification petition resulted in a mail ballot election conducted in August and September. However, the workers’ ballots were never actually counted. Now, Loreto and his National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have filed a Request for Review at the National Labor Relations Board in Washington, DC, asking the Board to overturn NLRB Region 31 Director Mori Rubin’s order that the workers’ ballots be destroyed and never counted.

Loreto’s appeal says that regional NLRB officials are illegally refusing to count votes that he and his colleagues have already cast in their decertification election to decide whether SAG-AFTRA officials should be booted from the workplace. According to Loreto’s Request for Review, regional NLRB officials not only improperly relied on unverified charges (also called “blocking charges”) from SAG-AFTRA union officials to block the vote, but ignored the NLRB’s own election rules and polices.

NLRB Rules and Regulations state that, if NLRB regional officials do not issue a complaint related to a union decertification election within 60 days of the election, the votes “shall be promptly opened and counted.” Because no timely complaint was issued and NLRB Region 31 nevertheless ordered the ballots tossed, Loreto’s Request for Review argues that the regional officials are clearly disobeying NLRB Rules and Regulations in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and are violating the workers’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

SBS Radio Host Fights Unpopular Union’s Scheme to Stay in Power

In July 2022, Loreto submitted a valid employee-backed petition to the NLRB, asking the agency to hold a vote in his workplace on whether to remove, or “decertify,” the SAG-AFTRA union. The NLRB is the agency responsible for enforcing federal private-sector labor law and will normally conduct a “decertification vote” among workers when the required number express support, by petition, to remove the union from their workplace.

Loreto and his coworkers began voting in the decertification election on August 26, and the scheduled date for the ballot count was September 20. However, in response to SAG-AFTRA union officials’ “blocking charges,” NLRB Region 31 impounded the ballots for 60 days while it investigated the union charges.

National Right to Work Foundation-backed reforms adopted in rulemaking by the NLRB in 2020 eased the process by which employees can free themselves of an unpopular union. Under the reforms, union officials in most cases can no longer unilaterally derail an employee-requested decertification vote simply by filing “blocking charges,” which often contain unrelated and unverified allegations of employer misconduct.

In most cases, employees can still exercise their right to vote, though in some limited cases NLRB officials can impound ballots for up to 60 days while dealing with “blocking charges.” After that period, however, the vote counting must commence absent the filing of a formal complaint by the NLRB Regional Director based on the union-instigated “blocking charges.”

Loreto’s Request for Review notes that, instead of counting the votes as mandated by NLRB rules, NLRB Region 31 instead continued impounding the ballots past 60 days and later dismissed Loreto and his coworkers’ petition. This order effectively ends the workers’ effort to oust the unpopular union and would destroy the workers’ ballots without them ever being counted, despite no complaint being issued at the time when Regional Director Rubin ordered the workers be disenfranchised.

Loreto’s petition now asks the NLRB in Washington to reverse the NLRB Regional Director’s ruling and to immediately order the counting of ballots in the election as mandated by the NLRB’s own rules.

Foundation Fights Union Boss Moves to Scale Back Worker Free Choice Rights

Foundation staff attorneys aid workers across the country in exercising their right to vote out union officials who don’t serve their interests. Foundation attorneys have recently guided workers in California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and many other states in navigating the NLRB decertification process. Foundation attorneys will also oppose the Biden NLRB’s recently-announced plan to reverse the 2020 Foundation-backed reforms to the NLRB’s election rules, an action which would make exercising decertification rights significantly harder for countless workers across the country.

“Mr. Loreto’s situation illustrates perfectly how the NLRB, an agency that is supposed to neutrally enforce federal labor law, puts its thumb on the scale to assist union boss schemes to retain power over the wishes of rank-and-file workers,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “This situation is even more egregious as the NLRB is disobeying its own rules and regulations to disenfranchise workers who simply want their votes to remove SAG-AFTRA from their workplace counted.”

“Workers should not have to endure months of litigation simply to exercise their right to oust a union they no longer want, and Foundation attorneys will fight with Mr. Loreto to right this injustice,” Mix added.

19 Dec 2022

Austin Minnesota Mayo Clinic Support Staff Vote Overwhelmingly to End Forced Union Dues Requirement

Posted in News Releases

49-17 Labor Board deauthorization vote comes as employees wait for window to hold vote to finally remove unwanted Steelworkers union boss “representation”

Austin, MN (December 19, 2022) – “We are so happy with the way the election turned out,” Mayo Clinic Austin patient care specialist Erin Krulish commented. “I think it really shows that all of us came together to show the union that we don’t want to keep paying them when they are doing nothing for us.”

A group of support employees at Mayo Clinic Health System in Austin, Minnesota, overwhelmingly voted to “deauthorize” United Steelworkers (USW) Local 11-00578 union in their workplace. The workers filed the deauthorization petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 18 with free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

Krulish filed the deauthorization petition for her coworkers who wanted to get rid of the so-called “union security clause” that authorizes USW union bosses to have clinic employees fired for refusing to financially support union activities. The request seeking the vote to end United Steelworkers union officials’ forced dues powers at Mayo Clinic Austin was signed by 49 of the 66 workers, well over the 30% required to trigger the NLRB-supervised election.

Minnesota is not a Right to Work state, meaning all workers in a unionized workplace can be required to pay dues or fees to a union as a condition of keeping their jobs. However, although winning such a vote can often be an uphill battle as independent workers have to take on professional forced-dues-funded union organizers, federal law does allow workers to hold deauthorization votes to end union officials’ legal authority to force workers to “pay up or be fired.”

The successful deauthorization vote at Mayo Clinic Austin comes as the workers wait for the opportunity to end USW officials so-called “representation” at the facility completely, a process known as decertification. “We plan to decertify come next December when our contract is up and we are ready for another fight!” Krulish said following the deauthorization victory.

Currently the non-statutory NLRB-invented “contract bar” doctrine blocks workers from holding a decertification vote to remove a union’s monopoly representation powers for up to three years when a union boss-imposed contract is in effect, consequently, a deauthorization vote, which isn’t limited by the contract bar was the employees’ only option. If the support staff at the Austin Mayo Clinic do decertify as they plan, they will join Minnesota nurses at Mayo Clinic Mankato and Mayo Clinic St. James in voting to oust union officials from their hospitals in just the six months.

Worker interest in removing unwanted unions is up nationwide. The NLRB’s own data show that, currently, a unionized private sector worker is more than twice as likely to be involved in a decertification effort as a nonunion worker is to be involved in a unionization campaign, with one analysis finding decertification petitions up 42% this year.

“We’re pleased Ms. Krulish and her coworkers are victorious in their effort to strip Steelworkers union bosses of their power to force workers to pay union dues or else be fired,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Ultimately, Minnesota needs a state Right to Work law to ensure that every individual worker has the freedom to decide whether or not to financially support a union, even those who can’t overcome the hurdles required to successfully navigate the complicated deauthorization process.”

“This case also shows why it is time to end the NLRB-concocted ‘contract bar’ that traps workers in union ranks they oppose for years at a time,” added Mix. “No worker anywhere should be forced under so-called union ‘representation’ they oppose.”

15 Dec 2022

Morris Tri-State Asphalt Workers Decisively Vote Out Teamsters Union Officials

Posted in News Releases

Recently workers in New York, California, and New Jersey have also successfully freed themselves of unwanted Teamsters “representation”

Chicago, IL (December 15, 2022) – Morris-based Tri-State Asphalt employee Brent Johnson and his coworkers have successfully voted Teamsters Local 179 union officials out of their workplace, following Johnson’s filing of a worker-backed petition earlier this month requesting a vote to remove the Teamsters union. Johnson received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation in filing the petition for his coworkers.

The vote, conducted by Indianapolis-based National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 25, tilted overwhelmingly against continued union boss control, with nearly 80 percent of the employees voting to reject the union. The NLRB is the agency responsible for enforcing federal private-sector labor law, which includes holding union “decertification votes” among workers.

Although the NLRB’s union decertification process is still prone to union boss-created roadblocks, Foundation-backed reforms the NLRB adopted in 2020 have made it somewhat easier for workers to remove unwanted union officials.

Before the reforms, for example, union officials could stop workers who requested a decertification vote from casting ballots by filing so-called “blocking charges,” which often contain unverified and unrelated allegations of employer misconduct. The rule changes improved the process so employees can at least have a chance to vote before any allegations surrounding the election are resolved.

Johnson submitted the employee-backed petition seeking a vote whether to remove the union during a Teamsters-ordered strike against Tri-State Asphalt, during which Teamsters bosses filed charges against Tri-State Asphalt management. After the vote, Teamsters officials could have further pursued those charges in an attempt to invalidate the election result. However, because of the Foundation-backed NLRB reforms’ focus on letting workers exercise their right to vote before charges are dealt with, Teamsters officials likely saw the decisive rejection by employees and understood opposing the workers’ will would be futile.

Because Illinois lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector employees, Teamsters union officials also had the power to force Johnson and his colleagues to pay dues or fees to the union hierarchy just to stay employed. In contrast, in the 27 Right to Work states – including neighboring Indiana, Wisconsin, Iowa and Kentucky – union membership and all union financial support are the choice of each individual worker and cannot be required as a condition of employment.

Foundation Aids Employees Coast-to-Coast in Kicking Out Teamsters Officials

Johnson and his coworkers’ successful decertification comes as Foundation staff attorneys are receiving increasing requests from workers seeking to boot Teamsters officials out of their workplaces. Just this month, Teamsters Local 294 officials fled an XPO Logistics workplace in Albany, NY, after driver William Chard obtained free Foundation legal aid in filing a petition for a decertification vote, which 65 percent of his coworkers backed.

On the West Coast, Foundation attorneys recently aided nurses in Sacramento, CA, and Home Depot freight drivers in San Jose, CA, in removing unwanted Teamsters Local 150 and Teamsters Local 853 officials, respectively.

The NLRB’s own data show that a unionized private sector worker is more than twice as likely to be involved in a decertification effort as the average nonunion worker is to be involved in a unionization campaign, with one analysis finding decertification petitions up 42 percent this year.

“Teamsters officials seem to be bleeding workplaces nationwide, a sign that they are prioritizing power and politics over the needs of workers,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Mr. Johnson’s case is unique, though, because without the Foundation-backed reforms to the NLRB’s union decertification process, Teamsters union officials could have made workers wade through months or even years of litigation just to exercise their right to vote out the union – which it turns out they overwhelmingly opposed.”

“However, even as workers across several industries are exercising this right at a rising rate, the Biden NLRB has announced rulemaking to roll back the Foundation-backed reforms that make decertifying unpopular unions easier,” Mix added. “The Foundation will oppose this move to hamper workers’ free choice rights, and will also continue to aid workers nationwide in voting out unions they oppose.”

13 Dec 2022

Teamsters Union Officials Flee Albany XPO Logistics Workplace After Vast Majority of Workers Seek Vote to Remove Them

Posted in News Releases

XPO Logistics employees in California and New Jersey have also recently ousted Teamsters officials

Albany, NY (December 13, 2022) – XPO Logistics truck driver William Chard and his coworkers are free from the control of unpopular Teamsters Local 294 union officials, following Chard’s filing of a worker-backed petition earlier this month requesting a vote to remove the union. Chard received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation in filing the petition for his coworkers.

Chard submitted the petition, which 65 percent of his coworkers signed, at National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 3 in Buffalo. The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal private-sector labor law and will generally conduct a “decertification vote” among workers when at least 30 percent of them express interest in ousting a union. However, likely unwilling to face a ballot-box rejection by the workers they claimed to “represent,” Teamsters bosses filed paperwork with the NLRB just days later disclaiming interest in Chard’s work unit.

Although the NLRB’s decertification process is still prone to union boss-created roadblocks, Foundation-backed reforms the NLRB adopted in 2020 have made it somewhat easier for workers to remove unwanted union officials.

Before the reforms, for example, union officials could stop workers who had requested a decertification vote from casting ballots by filing so-called “blocking charges,” which often contain unverified and unrelated allegations of employer misconduct. The rule changes improved the process so employees can usually at least have a chance to vote before any allegations surrounding the election are handled.

Because New York lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector employees, Teamsters union officials had the power to force Chard and his colleagues to pay dues or fees to the union hierarchy just to stay employed. In contrast, in Right to Work states, union membership and all union financial support are the choice of each individual worker and can’t be required as a condition of employment.

Foundation Aids XPO Logistics Employees from Coast-to-Coast in Kicking Out Teamsters Officials

Chard and his coworkers’ successful decertification is not the first in which Foundation staff attorneys have assisted XPO Logistics drivers in booting Teamsters officials out of their workplaces. In March 2021, Miguel Valle and his colleagues at XPO Logistics’ facility in Cinnaminson, NJ, voted 90 percent in favor of removing Teamsters Local 107 officials.

And that October, Los Angeles-based XPO Logistics employee Ozvaldo Gutierrez and his coworkers submitted a petition requesting a decertification vote to remove Teamsters Local 63 union bosses. Just as Local 294 officials did in Chard’s situation, Local 63 officials abandoned the Southern California facility before the NLRB scheduled an election.

Currently, the NLRB’s own data show that a unionized private sector worker is more than twice as likely to be involved in a decertification effort as the average nonunion worker is to be involved in a unionization campaign, with one analysis finding decertification petitions up 42 percent this year.

“Officials of the Teamsters union – a union that has spent a large portion of its history under federal supervision – have a well-earned reputation for prioritizing power and control over the needs of rank-and-file workers,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation attorneys were happy to assist Mr. Chard and his fellow drivers in exercising their right to throw out a Teamsters union that didn’t serve their interests, just as they’ve been happy to assist other XPO Logistics workers around the country in doing the same.”

“However, even as workers across a number of industries are exercising this right at a rising rate, the Biden NLRB has announced rulemaking to roll back the Foundation-backed reforms that make decertifying unpopular unions easier,” Mix added. “The Foundation will oppose this move to hamper workers’ free choice rights, and will also continue to aid workers nationwide in voting out unions they oppose.”

8 Dec 2022

Lucas County Employees Hit AFSCME Union with Federal Lawsuit for Seizing Union Dues in Violation of First Amendment

Posted in News Releases

Employees exercised constitutional right to stop funding union activities, but union-imposed restriction blocks exercise of right for over 90 percent of year

Toledo, OH (December 8, 2022) – Three Lucas County Job and Family Services (JFS) employees have filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Ohio Council 8 union and their employer. They charge union and county officials with seizing dues money from their paychecks in violation of the First Amendment. The employees are receiving free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and The Buckeye Institute.

The employees, Penny Wilson, Theresa Fannin, and Kozait Elkhatib, are asserting their constitutional rights recognized in the landmark 2018 Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME U.S. Supreme Court decision. In Janus, the Court declared it a First Amendment violation to force public sector workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. It also ruled that union officials can only deduct money from the paycheck of a public sector employee who has voluntarily waived his or her Janus rights.

“Plaintiffs . . . file this suit to stop Lucas County JFS and AFSCME from seizing union payments from them without their consent and to receive compensation for violations of their First Amendment rights,” reads the workers’ complaint.

Lucas County Employees Weren’t Informed of First Amendment Right to Abstain from Union Dues

Officials from AFSCME Council 8 and Lucas County JFS enforce a policy which permits the direct deduction of union dues from employees’ paychecks. According to the policy, employees who wish to stop subsidizing the union have only a handful of days per year in which to do so; an “escape period” that effectively forbids the exercise of their First Amendment Janus rights for over 90 percent of the year.

AFSCME union officials never informed Wilson, Fannin, and Elkhatib of this restriction. Union officials also never told the women that they had a First Amendment right under Janus to abstain from dues deductions, or that union dues could only be taken from them if they waived that right.

The employees discovered their Janus rights independently. Each attempted to exercise those rights twice by sending letters to AFSCME union officials stating that they were ending their union memberships and terminating dues deductions. AFSCME union officials denied all three women’s requests, stating that union dues deductions would continue because the letters missed the narrow “escape period” imposed by the union.

“Plaintiffs did not knowingly, intelligently, or voluntarily waive their First Amendment rights…The restrictions on stopping government dues deductions…are unenforceable as against public policy because the restriction significantly impinges on employees’ First Amendment rights,” reads the complaint.

Employees Seek Return of All Dues Seized Without Consent

Wilson, Fannin, and Elkhatib’s lawsuit seeks to stop Lucas County JFS and AFSCME union officials from seizing dues from their paychecks, and also seeks a refund of all union dues taken from their wages without their consent.

“AFSCME union officials decided to keep lining their pockets with money from Ms. Wilson, Ms. Fannin, and Ms. Elkhatib, instead of respecting each woman’s clear exercise of her First Amendment Janus right to stop supporting unwanted union activities,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “America’s public workers should not have to file federal lawsuits to defend their Janus rights, which union officials should inform them about in the first place before taking dues.”

“After learning of their First Amendment and Janus rights, Mses. Wilson, Fannin, and Elkhatib all notified their employer and the union in writing that they resigned from the union and requested that membership dues deductions stop,” said Jay R. Carson, senior litigator at The Buckeye Institute. “But as unions have done in so many other cases, AFSCME Council 8 refused to stop membership dues deductions and relied on the dues checkoff authorization card that unions have employed to disregard workers’ clear wishes. It is time for unions to start respecting workers’ wishes, and for public employers to start informing employees of their constitutional rights and stop acting as the unions’ bagman.”

Foundation attorneys scored a significant victory for Ohio public servants’ Janus rights in a 2020 lawsuit against another Ohio AFSCME local (Council 11). Rather than face off against Foundation attorneys, those AFSCME union officials backed down and settled the case. As a result, Foundation attorneys freed almost 30,000 Ohio public employees from a “maintenance of membership” scheme that limited the exercise of Janus rights to roughly once every three years.

7 Dec 2022

Flight Attendant Fired Over Religious Beliefs at Behest of TWU Union and Southwest Airlines Wins Reinstatement

Posted in News Releases

TWU union and Southwest retaliated against employee for speaking out against political stances and activities of union leadership that violated her religious beliefs

Dallas, TX (December 7, 2022) – With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, former Southwest Airlines flight attendant Charlene Carter has again triumphed in her federal lawsuit charging Transport Workers Union (TWU) officials and Southwest with illegally firing her over her religious beliefs and opposition to the union’s political activity.

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas this week ordered Southwest and the union to give Carter the maximum amount of compensatory and punitive damages permitted under federal law, plus back-pay, and other forms of relief that a jury originally awarded following Carter’s victory in a July trial.

“Bags fly free with Southwest,” begins the decision. “But free speech didn’t fly at all with Southwest in this case.”

The Court rejected union and airline arguments and also ordered that Carter should be fully reinstated as a flight attendant at Southwest, writing that “Southwest may ‘wanna get away’ from Carter because she might continue to express her beliefs, but the jury found that Southwest unlawfully terminated Carter for her protected expressions.” If only “front pay,” or what she would be making in wages until she finds a new job, is awarded, the Court reasoned, “the Court would complete Southwest’s unlawful scheme” of firing dissenting employees.

Following the District Court’s decision, National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix issued the following statement regarding Carter’s victory:

“Southwest and TWU union officials made Ms. Carter pay an unconscionable price just because she decided to speak out against the political activities of union officials in accordance with her deeply held religious beliefs. This decision vindicates Ms. Carter’s rights – but it’s also a stark reminder of the retribution that union officials will mete out against employees who refuse to toe the union line.

“Ms. Carter’s victory should prompt nationwide scrutiny of union bosses’ coercive, government-granted powers over workers, especially in the airline and rail industries. Even after her victory, she and her colleagues at Southwest and other airlines under union control are forced, as per the Railway Labor Act, to pay money to union officials just to keep their jobs.”

Flight Attendant Called Out Union Officials for Their Political Activities

As a Southwest employee, Carter joined TWU Local 556 in September 1996. A pro-life Christian, she resigned her membership in September 2013 after learning that her union dues were being used to promote causes that violate her conscience and have nothing to do with her workplace.

Carter resigned from union membership, but was still forced to pay fees to TWU Local 556 as a condition of her employment. State Right to Work laws do not protect her and her fellow flight attendants from forced union fees because airline and railway employees are covered by the federal Railway Labor Act (RLA). The RLA allows union officials to have a worker fired for refusing to pay union dues or fees. But it does protect the rights of nonmembers of the union who are forced to associate with a union, including the rights to criticize the union and its leadership, and advocate for changing the union’s current leadership.

In January 2017, Carter learned that Audrey Stone, the union president, and other TWU Local 556 officials used union money to attend the “Women’s March on Washington D.C.,” which was sponsored by political groups she opposed, including Planned Parenthood.

Carter, a vocal critic of Stone and the union, took to social media to challenge Stone’s leadership and to express support for a recall effort that would remove Stone from power. Carter also sent Stone a message affirming her commitment to both the recall effort and a National Right to Work law after the union had sent an email to employees telling them to oppose Right to Work.

After Carter sent Stone that email, Southwest managers notified Carter that they needed to have a mandatory meeting as soon as possible about “Facebook posts they had seen.” During this meeting, Southwest presented Carter screenshots of her pro-life posts and messages and questioned why she made them.

Carter explained her religious beliefs and opposition to the union’s political activities. Carter said that, by participating in the Women’s March, President Stone and TWU Local 556 members purported to represent all Southwest flight attendants. Southwest authorities told Carter that President Stone claimed to be harassed by Carter’s messages. A week after this meeting, Southwest fired Carter.

Flight Attendant Sues Southwest and TWU for Illegal Firing

In 2017, Carter filed her federal lawsuit with help from Foundation staff attorneys to challenge the firing as an abuse of her rights, alleging she lost her job because of her religious beliefs, standing up to TWU Local 556 officials, and criticizing the union’s political activities and how it spent employees’ dues and fees.

This week’s decision, in addition to awarding reinstatement, back-pay, prejudgment interest, and damages to Carter, also hits the TWU union and Southwest with injunctions forbidding them from discriminating against flight attendants for their religious beliefs and from failing to accommodate religious objectors. The decision also explicitly prohibits Southwest and the union from discriminating against Carter for exercising her rights under the RLA. Carter may, under the RLA, object to the forced payment of the part of dues used for political and other lawfully nonchargeable union expenses, pursuant to the National Right to Work Foundation’s U.S. Supreme Court victory in Ellis v. Railway Clerks (1984).

Another recent order in the case sanctions Southwest and union attorneys for failing to obey a court order requiring them to make a witness available for a deposition. Southwest and the TWU union are required to pay Carter more than $25,000 in fees and costs. The Court will later award Carter additional fees and costs as a result of the final judgment in her favor.

29 Nov 2022

NLRB Rejects USW Union Boss Attempt to Impose Contract Workers Voted Down to Block Election to Remove Union

Posted in News Releases

Steelworkers union officials attempted to wield anti-worker “contract bar” to trap workers in union they oppose, using union contract workers twice rejected

Franklin, PA (November 29, 2022) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Kerry Hunsberger and her coworkers at Latrobe Specialty Metals Company have scored a victory in their effort to vote United Steelworkers (USW) union officials out of their facility. Hunsberger and her coworkers are challenging USW officials’ secret “ratification” of a union contract that workers had overwhelmingly voted down twice, and union officials’ contention that the employees should be barred from exercising their right to oust the union because of that contract.

A decision from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Regional Director in Pittsburgh now orders a union “decertification election” to be held among Hunsberger and her colleagues on December 6. In August, Hunsberger submitted to the NLRB a petition backed by the requisite number of her colleagues to trigger such a vote, but USW union bosses dragged their feet and argued that a non-statutory NLRB policy, the so-called “contract bar,” should block the employees’ right to vote because a contract was in place.

The “contract bar” arbitrarily immunizes unions from employee decertification votes for up to three years after a contract between union and company officials is finalized. The Regional Director’s decision rejects USW officials’ “contract bar” claims on the grounds that, in union officials’ haste to block the election, their so-called “contract” was sloppily drafted and lacked fundamental elements like the start and end dates the contract would be in effect. “I find, consistent with Petitioner, that the contract does not include effective and expiration dates and accordingly lacks material terms required for an agreement to act as a contract bar,” says the decision.

The decision, unfortunately, doesn’t explicitly address the most egregious of the USW union officials’ anti-worker tactics. USW officials lied to workers about their ratification votes, and attempted to impose a contract twice rejected by rank-and-file workers – all so employees could be trapped in forced dues-paying ranks for three additional years under the non-statutory, incumbent-protecting “contract bar” policy.

Steelworkers Union Officials Signed Unpopular Contract to Avoid Being Voted Out by Workers

Latrobe Specialty Metals workers first voted July 25 on the contract drawn up by Steelworkers union officials. The workers soundly rejected the contract, and Hunsberger began collecting employee signatures for a “decertification petition” shortly afterwards.

According to documents and transcripts filed with the NLRB, when Steelworkers union officials discovered a decertification petition was circulating, they secretly and unilaterally signed the disfavored contract on July 28, without telling the employees or the employer, in an attempt to trigger the “contract bar” rule and avoid being voted out.

In their haste to enact the employee-rejected contract to trigger the “contract bar,” union officials didn’t finalize critical details of the contract like the start and end dates. Even though the union claims this contract was supposedly in effect on July 28, union officials held a new employee ratification vote on August 1, encouraging workers to ratify the contract, but not telling them their “vote” was a meaningless formality because the officials had already signed the contract and claimed it was in effect.

Hunsberger submitted a valid decertification petition on August 1, just hours before the sham contract vote occurred. As with the previous vote, the workers again lopsidedly rejected the contract. But later that night, union officials suddenly announced to the employer that the contract was already in effect and the ratification vote was not required or necessary because of the union bosses’ covert signing on July 28.

According to the hearing transcript, one union boss admitted under oath that the Steelworkers union executes contracts despite employees voting them down, and that he did so in this case and ignored the employees’ vote against the contract “to protect the integrity of the union.” Apparently the Steelworkers bosses’ lust for monopoly bargaining power and compulsory dues payments takes precedence over employee democracy.

The Steelworkers Union’s post-hearing brief openly admits that union officials “executed the contract on July 28 to … pre-empt the decertification petition circulating at the facility” and that the August 1 “vote was only taken as a courtesy to employees [and] was an attempt to obtain their blessing of the contract that the [union officials] had already executed.”

In the same brief union bosses doubled down on their deceptive practices, stating that “the Union’s representations to employees here are irrelevant… and the union was within its discretion to take a vote of its members and was not obligated to abide by the results of such a vote” (emphasis added).

Foundation President: Decision Encouraging, But Exposes Anti-Worker Bias of Federal Labor Law

“We’re pleased that Ms. Hunsberger and her colleagues will finally have a chance to vote out Steelworkers union officials who have glaring contempt for the wishes of the rank-and-file workers,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “However, that this decision ordering the election has to rely on the technicalities of what elements were or were not in the rushed union agreement shows how ingrained pro-forced unionism policies like the ‘contract bar’ are in federal law.”

“It remains outrageous that, had Steelworkers bosses merely added dates to this contract, the NLRB would have likely ruled that it was perfectly allowable for union officials to lie to workers, ignore their votes to reject the contract, and then trap them under union control and forced dues payments for at least three more years,” Mix added. “This highlights the injustice of the NLRB-concocted ‘contract bar’ policy that arbitrarily blocks workers’ statutory right to vote out union officials they oppose, and how it is antithetical to the NLRB’s supposed goal of defending employee free choice.”

28 Nov 2022

California Home Depot Freight Drivers Overwhelmingly Vote to Oust Unwanted Teamsters Union

Posted in News Releases

After over 80% of drivers voted against union, workers are free of union monopoly ‘representation’ and forced union fee demands

San Jose, CA (November 28, 2022) – A group of freight drivers at Home Depot in San Jose, California, have overwhelmingly voted to remove the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 853 union from their workplace. The workers’ decertification petition was filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 32 with free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

Home Depot employee Jose Flores filed the decertification petition for his coworkers who wanted to oust the unpopular union. The request seeking to end Teamsters union officials’ monopoly bargaining powers at Home Depot was signed by enough workers in the bargaining unit to trigger an NLRB-conducted secret ballot vote on whether to remove the union. Twenty-one of the 26 workers who voted – more than 80% – were in favor of removing Teamsters union officials.

“Yes, we won the election and it would not have been possible without your help and without the support of my co-workers,” Mr. Flores commented. “I do not know what the correct words would be to express it, but I feel victorious for having won. The victory is not only mine because without the support of my co-workers it would not have been possible.”

California is not a Right to Work state. That means all workers in a unionized workplace can legally be required to join or pay dues or fees to a union as a condition of keeping their jobs. Because the workers voted to oust Teamsters union officials, the officials will be stripped of their monopoly ‘representation’ powers used to impose forced union dues.

The successful decertification vote at Home Depot comes as interest in holding votes to remove unions increases nationwide. The NLRB’s own data show that, currently, a unionized private sector worker is more than twice as likely to be involved in a decertification effort as the average nonunion worker is to be involved in a unionization campaign, with one analysis finding decertification petitions up 42% this year.

“We’re pleased Jose Flores and his coworkers were able to oust unwanted Teamsters officials from their workplace,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “No worker anywhere should be forced under so-called union “representation” they oppose.”

“Foundation staff attorneys stand ready to provide free legal aid to workers from coast-to-coast in exercising their legal rights to hold a decertification election so they can vote out a union they oppose,” added Mix.

21 Nov 2022

Las Vegas Police Officer Urges Supreme Court to Hear Case Battling Union’s Unconstitutional Dues Scheme

Posted in News Releases

LVMPD officer argues union officials seized her money in violation of First Amendment through restrictive arrangement to which she never consented

Washington, DC (November 21, 2022) – Las Vegas police officer Melodie DePierro has submitted a petition asking the United States Supreme Court to hear her lawsuit defending her First Amendment right to abstain from paying dues to a union she does not support. DePierro is receiving free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

DePierro, a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) officer, contends in the lawsuit that officials of the Las Vegas Police Protective Association (PPA) union seized dues money from her paycheck in violation of her First Amendment rights pursuant to a so-called “window period” specified in the union contract. PPA officials’ “window period” scheme prohibits police officers from opting out of union financial support for over 90% of the year. DePierro never consented to – nor was ever informed of – this limitation.

DePierro seeks to enforce her First Amendment rights recognized by the Supreme Court in the landmark 2018 Janus v. AFSCME case, which was argued and won by Foundation attorneys. The Justices ruled in Janus that forcing public sector workers to subsidize an unwanted union as a condition of employment violates the First Amendment. They also held that union officials can only deduct dues from a public sector employee who has affirmatively waived his or her Janus rights.

“[I]f employee consent is not required, governments and unions can, and will…devise and enforce onerous restrictions on when employees can stop subsidizing union speech,” reads the brief.

PPA Union Officials Imposed on Officer Contract Provision She Never Knew About

According to DePierro’s original complaint, she began working for LVMPD in 2006 and voluntarily joined the PPA union at that time. However, in 2006 the union monopoly bargaining contract permitted employees to terminate dues deductions at any time.

In January 2020, she first tried to exercise her Janus rights, sending letters to both union officials and the LVMPD stating that she was resigning her membership. The letters demanded a stop to union dues being taken from her paycheck.

Her complaint reported that union and police department agents rejected that request because of the union-imposed “window period” restriction previously unknown to DePierro that purportedly limits when employees can exercise their Janus rights. As her brief notes, that “window period” restriction was added in the 2019 monopoly bargaining contract between union officials and the police department, despite the fact Janus had already been decided by then.

DePierro never agreed to such a restriction on the exercise of her First Amendment rights, but union agents nonetheless rebuffed her again when she renewed her demand to stop dues deductions in February 2020. When she filed her lawsuit, full union dues were still coming out of her paycheck.

DePierro’s Supreme Court petition argues that, because union officials kept seizing money from her wages under the guise of the “window period,” and never sought her consent to the restriction, they violated the First Amendment. As per Janus, union officials must obtain a worker’s waiver of their Janus rights before deducting dues or fees from their pay. DePierro asks the High Court to declare the “window period” scheme unconstitutional, forbid PPA and LVMPD from further enforcing it, and order PPA and LVMPD to refund with interest all dues unlawfully withheld from her pay since she tried to stop the deductions.

“This Court’s review is urgently needed because the Ninth Circuit’s decision is allowing governments and unions to unilaterally decide when and how to restrict employees’ right to refrain from subsidizing union speech—without the need to secure their affirmative consent to the restriction,” asserts the brief.

Officer Joins California Lifeguards in Asking Justices to Uphold Janus Ruling

DePierro’s petition comes as 21 Foundation-represented Southern California lifeguards are also urging the Supreme Court to hear their case challenging an anti-Janus dues scheme concocted by California Statewide Law Enforcement Agency (CSLEA) union officials. That scheme has trapped the lifeguards in union membership and full dues deductions until 2023, despite each of the lifeguards exercising his or her Janus right to abstain from union membership and union financial support.

As in DePierro’s case, the lifeguards were not explicitly informed of the so-called “maintenance of membership” restriction which now confines them in membership and full dues payment. Moreover, union officials never obtained voluntary waivers of Janus rights from any of the lifeguards before subjecting them to this scheme.

Janus’ First Amendment protections are meant to ensure that workers are not being forced to subsidize union bosses of whom they disapprove, whether based on union officials’ ineffectiveness, political activities, divisive conduct in the workplace, or any other reason,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Union officials’ defense of schemes that siphon money out of unwilling workers’ paychecks sends a clear message that they value dues revenue over the constitutional rights of the workers they claim to ‘represent.’”

“Two parties, here the union and police department, cannot enter into an agreement to restrict the First Amendment rights of an American citizen, yet that is exactly what has happened here to Officer DePierro,” Mix added. “The Supreme Court must defend Janus rights against such obvious violations, and ensure that these unconstitutional schemes are not allowed to stand.”

10 Nov 2022

SF Security Officer Slams SEIU Union and Allied Universal with Federal Charges for Discrimination & Unfair Labor Practices

Posted in News Releases

Despite informing both management and union of religious objections to union membership and financial support, employer seized money from worker’s paycheck for union

San Francisco, CA (November 10, 2022) – Thomas Ross, a San Francisco-based security officer employed by Allied Universal, has hit union officials affiliated with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and his employer with two sets of federal charges for forcing him to join and financially support the union after he told both parties his religious beliefs forbid union support. He is receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

Ross filed both federal discrimination charges, which will now be investigated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and unfair labor practice charges, which will be handled by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Ross is a Christian and opposes union affiliation on religious grounds. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits unions and employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of religion. Title VII thus forbids forcing individuals to fund or support a union, the activities of which conflict with their religion. It also requires unions and employers to accommodate religious objections to union payments. Yet, according to Ross’ discrimination charges, SEIU union bosses flatly denied a request he made for such an accommodation.

Ross’ unfair labor practice charges, filed at NLRB Region 20, state that SEIU bosses and Allied Universal officials breached basic federal law by telling him that union membership is mandatory. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects private sector workers’ right to abstain from any or all union activities, and forced union membership is prohibited regardless of an individual worker’s reason for not wanting to affiliate with a union.

California’s lack of Right to Work protections for its private sector workers means that union officials are granted the power to force workers to pay them fees or be fired in workplaces where they maintain power. However, under federal law, employees with religious objections cannot be compelled to pay such fees. In Right to Work states, in contrast, no worker can be fired for refusal to financially support a union.

Union’s Discriminatory Demands Violate Both Title VII and Basic Federal Labor Law

According to his discrimination charges, 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, his charges state that on July 20, 2022, “Allied Universal…demanded that I sign a payroll deduction, join the unions, and pay union dues.”

On August 31, 2022, Ross reminded Allied Universal of his religious objection to paying union dues, but on September 15, 2022, Ross’ “employer stated that union membership was compulsory and deducted union fees” from his paycheck without his consent.

Ross’ unfair labor practice charges state that those deductions violate the NLRA, because that statute prohibits the deduction of union dues and fees unless the employee has signed a written authorization. Ross’ discrimination charges argue that both his employer and the union have also violated his rights “under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964” and parallel state non-discrimination laws.

Foundation Attorneys Regularly Win Cases for Workers Facing Religious Discrimination

Workers nationwide frequently turn to the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid when union chiefs snub their requests for religious accommodations or otherwise discriminate against them based on their religious beliefs.

This past July, Foundation staff attorneys scored a multi-million-dollar jury verdict for former Southwest flight attendant Charlene Carter, whom Transport Workers Union (TWU) officials subjected to ridicule based on her religious opposition to union activities. This March, also with Foundation aid, Fort Campbell custodial worker Dorothy Frame won a settlement gaining a religious accommodation after Laborers’ (LIUNA) union officials unlawfully questioned her religious belief that she could not support financially the union’s political activities.

“The Foundation is proud to help working men and women who courageously stand up for their beliefs even in the midst of union coercion,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “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.”