Washington, DC (November 19, 2009) – Because the Obama Administration has stonewalled a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted last April, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed a lawsuit today to compel the Department of Labor (DOL) to release information related to high-ranking officials’ contact with union operatives.

“The Administration’s apparent involvement with union officials fatally undermines the integrity of the Department of Labor’s rule-making and administrative oversight,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The public deserves to know the extent of the close ties between this Administration and organized labor bosses.”

National Right to Work originally lodged a FOIA request last spring, seeking disclosure on high-ranking DOL officials’ connections to powerful union lobbying interests. The FOIA submission cited concerns about Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, who previously held a key leadership position at the Big Labor-front group “American Rights at Work,” and Deborah Greenfield, a DOL appointee who previously worked with the AFL-CIO to overturn the same union disclosure guidelines she now oversees.

As of today, the DOL has refused to honor President Obama’s widely touted promise of transparency and has failed to follow federal laws requiring the timely disclosure of public information. As a result, Right to Work attorneys concluded that a federal lawsuit was the only way to compel the level of transparency promised by President Obama and guaranteed under the Freedom of Information Act.

“It’s absolutely vital that this information is made available to the public to dispel real concerns about conflicts of interest at the Department of Labor,” continued Mix. “On the campaign trail, Obama said that ‘the way to hold government accountable is to make it transparent so that the American people can know exactly what decisions are being made [and] how they’re being made.’ We intend to hold him to that promise.”

Employee Lawsuit Pushes Teacher Union Bosses to Refund Dues, Allow Educators to Resign

Despite a partial victory, Right to Work Foundation presses forward with
lawsuit to ensure all public educators’ rights are protected

Louisville, KY (November 18, 2009) – Facing an embarrassing legal setback from rank-and-file teachers, Jefferson County Teacher Association (JCTA union officials announced their intention to refund several educators’ forced dues and allow public school employees to resign from union membership during a new window period and terminate certain forced dues payments.

This announcement comes on the heels of a class-action lawsuit filed by Jefferson County educators with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation. The lawsuit, filed against the JCTA union and its national affiliate, the National Education Association (NEA) union, in U.S. District Court, seeks the return of illegally seized dues, a modification of the union’s contract to allow employees to resign from union membership at any time, and a regular notice from the union brass informing public school employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership . . .

(Read more here)

Louisville, KY (November 18, 2009) – Facing an embarrassing legal setback from rank-and-file teachers, Jefferson County Teacher Association (JCTA) union officials announced their intention to refund several educators’ forced dues and allow public school employees to resign from union membership during a new window period and terminate certain forced dues payments.

This announcement comes on the heels of a class-action lawsuit filed by Jefferson County educators with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation. The lawsuit, filed against the JCTA union and its national affiliate, the National Education Association (NEA) union, in U.S. District Court, seeks the return of illegally seized dues, a modification of the union’s contract to allow employees to resign from union membership at any time, and a regular notice from the union brass informing public school employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership.

Currently, teachers employed in Jefferson County are automatically enrolled as union members and forced to pay full union dues unless they explicitly register an objection to JCTA union officials. Before union officials announced their new policy, teachers were only permitted to resign from formal union membership during a ten day-window period after an individual teacher’s contract was signed or after the union hierarchy agreed to a new contract with the local school board. If a teacher failed to register an objection to union membership within either period, he or she was forced to remain a full dues-paying union member until the expiration of the union’s five-year contract with the local school board.

The suit has already prompted union officials to announce their intention to refund over $1,100 of confiscated union dues to each of the lawsuit’s named plaintiffs, but apparently not to the hundreds of other educators represented in the class action lawsuit. Union officials have also unveiled a new opt-out period for educators seeking to leave the union that lasts until December 31.

However, Foundation attorneys believe that these changes do not address several core concerns raised in the educators’ lawsuit. Under the new policy, Jefferson County educators can still be automatically enrolled in the union without their consent and dissatisfied union members will still be forced to wait for an unconstitutional, union-designated window period to resign. Moreover, JCTA officials retain the option of reversing these policy changes without a binding legal precedent.

“Union bosses know that their illegal policy won’t hold up under the scrutiny of a federal class-action lawsuit, and this belated concession is a desperate attempt to avoid issuing refunds to literally hundreds of educators whose rights have been violated,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “JCTA bosses must get rid of their coercive membership policy in its entirety, and we intend to pursue all legal remedies available to the Kentucky educators whose rights are being violated.”

Independent-Minded Employees Slap Teamster Bosses with Federal Labor Charges For Illegal Threats

Right to Work Foundation aids courageous employees who union bosses threatened to have fired

Auburn, Washington (November 17, 2009) – Two Alan Ritchey Incorporated employees have hit local Teamster union officials with unfair labor practice charges after the union brass illegally threatened them with imminent termination.

Gayle May and Patricia Allen, employees of the transportation, storage, and mail delivery manufacturer and supplier, contacted the National Right to Work Foundation after they received a letter from Teamster Local 117 union officials giving them only days to exercise their legal rights to refrain from paying union dues spent for non-bargaining activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events, even though they had already exercised these rights.

With help from Foundation attorneys, the employees – on behalf of dozens of other similarly-situated Alan Ritchey employees – filed the charges with the National Labor Relations Board regional office in Seattle.

(Read the full press release)

Auburn, Washington (November 17, 2009) – Two Alan Ritchey Incorporated employees have hit local Teamster union officials with unfair labor practice charges after the union brass illegally threatened them with imminent termination.

Gayle May and Patricia Allen, employees of the transportation, storage, and mail delivery manufacturer and supplier, contacted the National Right to Work Foundation after they received a letter from Teamster Local 117 union officials giving them only days to exercise their legal rights to refrain from paying union dues spent for non-bargaining activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events, even though they had already exercised these rights.

With help from Foundation attorneys, the employees – on behalf of dozens of other similarly-situated Alan Ritchey employees – filed the charges with the National Labor Relations Board regional office in Seattle.

May and Allen held a clear and longstanding objection to formal, dues paying union membership exercising their rights under the Foundation-won Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988) U.S. Supreme Court victory. In Beck, the Court held that union officials can lawfully compel nonmembers to pay some union dues as a job condition, but they cannot forcibly extract dues spent for union electioneering and other non-bargaining activities.

Over the years, May and Allen have filed several charges against Teamsters 117 over its campaign of retaliation and harassment against independent-minded employees who exercise their Beck rights.

In a new twist, Teamster Local 117 union bosses – citing a new contract between the union and the employer – bullied May and Allen with threats of fines and termination unless they “reiterate” their intentions to exercise their rights under Beck. Employees who exercise their right to refrain from full dues paying union membership are not required to “reiterate” or “renew” their status. Regardless, Local 117 officials sent the employees the letter giving them only a few days to do so (without detailing how) or they would be fired from their jobs.

"It is clear that Local 117 union bosses are employing a new form of illegal harassment aimed at purging independent-minded employees from the workplace," said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. "Incidents like this reinforces why Washington needs to pass a state Right to Work law to protect independent-minded employees from shameful union boss threats and intimidation."

Phoenix and Tucson, Arizona (November 12, 2009) – America’s preeminent workers’ rights advocacy organization which helps victims of union coercion is offering free legal aid to workers whose rights are abused during the United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) union-ordered strike scheduled to begin tomorrow.

Union officials apparently intend to impose fines upon union members who wish to continue to go to their jobs in opposition to the union’s militant approach.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has received numerous calls from Arizona Safeway Stores, Inc. and Kroger-owned Fry’s Food Stores employees who want to continue providing for themselves and their families during the UFCW union-ordered strike.  The Foundation encourages workers to learn about their rights from independent sources and posted a special legal notice for workers on its website at https://www.nrtw.org.

"Not long ago, UFCW union bosses ordered an unpopular strike in Southern California, and for five months employees were out of work," said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.  "Now the union brass wants to replicate that situation in Arizona, and concerned workers are contacting the Foundation seeking help."

"The National Right to Work Foundation stands ready to defend the rights of employees who want to continue supporting themselves and their families, and those who are illegally threatened or coerced by UFCW union bosses for doing so," added Gleason.

Under Supreme Court precedent and under the protections guaranteed by Arizona’s popular Right to Work law:

• Workers have the right to resign from union membership.

• Workers have the right to go to work even if the union is on strike. If a worker chooses to work during a strike, they must first resign from union membership to avoid oppressive union disciplinary actions and fines.

• Workers have the right to revoke their dues check-off authorization and stop allowing union officials to collect money from their paycheck. Now that there is no longer a collective bargaining agreement in effect between UFCW union bosses and Safeway/Fry’s, employees can revoke their dues deduction authorizations at any time.

• Workers have the right to sign a decertification petition to hold a secret ballot election to remove the union hierarchy from the workplace.

The full notice can be found at www.nrtw.org/ufcwaz

Orlando, FL (November 4, 2009) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a local worker is challenging Teamster officials’ efforts to block several UPS employees from opting out of union dues.

Dean Alamo, a Kissimmee resident and UPS freight employee, filed federal unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 385 union and UPS on behalf of himself and similarly situated workers.

In August 2009, Alamo and several other UPS employees resigned from the Teamsters union and attempted to revoke their dues deduction authorizations, which are used by union officials to automatically withhold dues from employee paychecks. Despite employees’ best efforts, union operatives continue to collect full dues from workers who previously resigned from the union. Moreover, Teamster officials have not registered an objection to Alamo’s or any other worker’s dues deduction revocations.

Alamo also requested that UPS and the union notify him if there was a designated window period to opt out of union dues. Both UPS and the Teamsters failed to respond to Alamo’s inquiry.

Alamo’s charges will now be investigated by the NLRB, which can prosecute the union for violating the legal rights of the employees they claim to represent.

“Despite repeated requests, the local Teamster union and the company have ignored workers’ attempts to stop paying union dues” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “We intend to make sure that Teamster operatives play by the rules and stop extorting union dues from unwilling workers.”

AFL-CIO Launches Sneak Attack on Nation’s Non-Union Railway and Airline Workers

National Right to Work opposes union officials’ quiet efforts to grease the skids to impose forced unionism at non-union workplaces

Washington, DC (November 3, 2009) – America’s preeminent workers’ rights advocacy organization raised the alarm about an under-the-radar attempt by the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and 30 other unions to make a dramatic change to labor regulations, enabling union organizers to corral tens of thousands of non-union railway and airline industry workers into union membership.

Yesterday, the National Mediation Board (NMB), a government agency charged under the Railway Labor Act with mediating labor disputes within the railroad and airline industries, voted 2-1 to preliminarily support the controversial changes. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation sent a letter objecting to the AFL-CIO union’s proposals and the NMB is requesting comments on the proposed changes. The Foundation will file formal comments in the coming days.

The AFL-CIO union bosses’ proposal urges the NMB to discard its policy of requiring a true majority of all workers within a collective bargaining unit to decide for themselves if they wish to be represented by a union – a 75-year-old precedent – and instead implement new procedures that require only a majority of workers actually voting in a union organizing election to make that decision for the whole group.

(Read the full press release)

Washington, DC (November 3, 2009) – America’s preeminent workers’ rights advocacy organization raised the alarm about an under-the-radar attempt by the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and 30 other unions to make a dramatic change to labor regulations, enabling union organizers to corral tens of thousands of non-union railway and airline industry workers into union membership.

Yesterday, the National Mediation Board (NMB), a government agency charged under the Railway Labor Act with mediating labor disputes within the railroad and airline industries, voted 2-1 to preliminarily support the controversial changes.  The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation sent a letter objecting to the AFL-CIO union’s proposals and the NMB is requesting comments on the proposed changes.  The Foundation will file formal comments in the coming days.

The AFL-CIO union bosses’ proposal urges the NMB to discard its policy of requiring a true majority of all workers within a collective bargaining unit to decide for themselves if they wish to be represented by a union – a 75-year-old precedent – and instead implement new procedures that require only a majority of workers actually voting in a union organizing election to make that decision for the whole group.

The National Right to Work Foundation opposes the AFL-CIO’s proposal because it makes it exceedingly difficult for independent-minded workers to resist Big Labor’s well-funded, professional organizing machine, particularly since these campaigns must be run across an entire, often-nationwide bargaining unit.  The proposed change also imposes a greater burden on employees who wish to refrain from union membership by forcing them to either take affirmative action to oppose the union or otherwise potentially allow far less than a majority make that decision for them.

“Apparently unable to convince a true majority of affected workers to vote for unionization under the current process, AFL-CIO operatives are attempting to change the rules to give themselves the upper hand over the workers,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of National Right to Work. “Individual workers should never be forced into union ranks against their will, and it’s unconscionable that union bosses want to be able to impose unionization without an actual majority of employees ever showing support for a union.”

The National Right to Work Foundation’s letter also calls on the NMB to establish a formal process for workers wanting to remove a union as their monopoly bargaining agent as required under Foundation-won precedent in U.S. federal court.