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.

New York, NY (November 2, 2009) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a local employee has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the Newspaper Guild of New York Local 3 Union.

Jeremy Rosenbaum, a financial analyst at Standard & Poor’s, is not a union member and had previously exercised his right to opt-out of certain union dues. In July of 2009, Rosenbaum discovered that union officials arbitrarily stripped him of his objector status, forcing him to pay full dues.

Although employees can be required to pay union dues as a condition of employment, the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision Communication Workers v. Beck guarantees the right of workers to opt-out of dues intended for purposes other than union bargaining, including lobbying, political activism, and members-only activities.

However, local union bosses maintain a controversial policy that requires employees to annually renew their objection to paying forced union dues unrelated to bargaining. If an employee fails to register an objection within a window period designated by union officials, they are automatically re-enrolled as full dues-payers.

In response, Rosenbaum filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), seeking union recognition of his right to opt-out of dues for ideological activities and a rescission of the union’s annual objection policy. The charges will now be investigated by NLRB officials. Several courts and NLRB administrative law judges have ruled similar policies unlawful.

“We intend to make the union hierarchy pay for their violations of employee rights,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “However, the best way to protect all workers from similar mistreatment would be for New York to adopt a Right to Work law, making the payment of union dues purely voluntary.”

Columbia, South Carolina (October 30, 2009) – A local employee of Wackenhut Services, Inc, a security service provider contracted with Fort Jackson, is fighting back against compulsory unionism after union officials illegally attempted to have him fired from his job for refusing to pay forced union dues.

In September 2008, Ronald I. Paul filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) challenging Wackenhut and International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America (SPFPA) and its affiliated Local 339 union bosses after Wackenhut fired him in August 2008 for refraining from formal, dues paying union membership.  The charges were eventually settled in December of 2008 and Paul continued his employment.

Starting in May 2009, in violation of the settlement, the employer and SPFPA union officials issued new threats against Paul’s job. Claiming that Paul’s workplace is on an “exclusive federal enclave” not protected by South Carolina’s popular Right to Work law, SPFPA union officials compelled Paul to attend a meeting and coerced him to apply for union membership as a condition to keep his job.  In response, Paul filed another round of unfair labor practice charges against the union – pointing out that the union’s own contract explicitly states that formal union membership is not a condition of employment. In September, the NLRB notified Mr. Paul that his charges would be dismissed.

Attorneys from the National Right to Work Foundation contacted Mr. Paul offering free legal aid (which Paul eagerly accepted), and the regional NLRB office in Winston-Salem, North Carolina is now investigating Paul’s charges and additional charges filed by Foundation attorneys. Related charges against Wackenhut are also pending.

In the Foundation-won Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988), the U.S. Supreme Court held that union officials can lawfully compel nonmembers to pay union dues as a job condition, but not the part of dues spent for non-bargaining activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events.  Under Beck, unions must also provide such employees with an audited breakdown of chargeable expenses.

SPFPA union officials continue to threaten Paul despite the fact that they did not provide him with an adequate explanation as required under Beck for the basis of their claims against a portion of his earnings.  Additionally, SPFPA union bosses are requiring employees who refrain from formal, dues paying union membership to partake in an overly burdensome process of specifying the amount of non-bargaining dues they do not wish to pay without providing them with sufficient information to make such a decision.  And finally, Paul is challenging the SPFPA union’s nationwide policy of requiring employees to object every single year to paying union dues they cannot be lawfully forced to pay – rather than objecting just once.

“SPFPA union bosses have repeatedly reneged on their own word and we hope the NLRB will now hold them accountable for their thuggery,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.   “Right to Work litigators stand guard with Mr. Paul to protect him from union bosses who will stop at nothing to seize hard earned money for their own purposes.”

Jackson, MI (October 28, 2009) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, three local employees have filed unfair labor practice charges against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 164 union for obstructing their attempts to opt-out of forced union dues.

Michael Vetrovec, Robert Harris, and Larry Kunk are employed by Perfection Associates L.L.C. in Jackson, Michigan. All three employees object to Teamster membership and attempted to opt-out of paying full union dues.

Because Michigan lacks a Right to Work law, employees can be forced to pay certain union dues as a condition of employment. But the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision Communication Workers v. Beck guarantees the right of workers to opt-out of forced dues intended for purposes other than workplace bargaining, including lobbying, political activism, and members-only activities.

However, Teamsters officials have not stopped collecting forced dues from Vetrovec, Harris, and Kunk earmarked for non-chargeable activities. Union officials have also failed to provide them with an independently audited breakdown of union expenditures, which is required by law to ensure that workers are not being compelled to pay for objectionable activities.

Moreover, union officials told Vetrovec that he would have to sign another check-off form authorizing the automatic payroll deduction of union dues if he wanted to opt-out of dues unrelated to collective bargaining. Previous Foundation-won precedents have also established that non-members cannot be required to authorize automatic dues deduction.

The charges will now be investigated by the National Labor Relations Board.

“While we’re confident that this dispute will be resolved in favor of the workers, no one should have to file federal charges just to keep their hard-earned salary from being diverted to fund a union’s radical politics,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The best way to end this type of abuse would be for Michigan to adopt a Right to Work law, making the payment of union dues strictly voluntary.”

Nonunion Worker Challenges San Diego’s Discriminatory School Construction Scheme

Right to Work attorneys argue pact between San Diego school district and
union officials intends to illegally coerce workers into union ranks

San Diego, CA (October 7, 2009) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys today filed federal unfair labor practice charges against local area unions for establishing a discriminatory, union-only construction scheme with the San Diego Unified School District. The agreement enriches union officials, punishes nonunion workers and employers, and sticks taxpayers with the bill.

The discrimination against nonunion construction workers is facilitated by a so-called “Project Labor Agreement” (PLA) – essentially a collective bargaining agreement signed by contractors as a condition of performing work on a government-funded construction project. Arguing that the PLA between the school district and various unions (including the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters and San Diego Building & Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO) illegally discriminates against construction workers who exercise their right to refrain from union membership, Foundation attorneys are defending the interests of the vast majority of construction employees in California who have opted against unionization.

(Read the full press release)

San Diego, CA (October 7, 2009) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys today filed federal unfair labor practice charges against local area unions for establishing a discriminatory, union-only construction scheme with the San Diego Unified School District. The agreement enriches union officials, punishes nonunion workers and employers, and sticks taxpayers with the bill.

The discrimination against nonunion construction workers is facilitated by a so-called “Project Labor Agreement” (PLA) – essentially a collective bargaining agreement signed by contractors as a condition of performing work on a government-funded construction project. Arguing that the PLA between the school district and various unions (including the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters and San Diego Building & Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO) illegally discriminates against construction workers who exercise their right to refrain from union membership, Foundation attorneys are defending the interests of the vast majority of construction employees in California who have opted against unionization.

Last November, San Diego voters approved a $2.1 billion school bond, called Proposition S. California law requires that all qualified contractors’ employees complete state-mandated “apprenticeship” programs, but it is illegal under federal law to discriminate against workers or businesses on account of union association. The discriminatory PLA, however, requires workers to go through union-run apprenticeship programs (disqualifying high quality training programs run by employers and other groups), and the subcontracting clause further attempts to coerce even more workers into union ranks.

Foundation attorneys are providing free legal aid to and filing the federal charges for Wesley Fuller, a Brady Company employee who hangs drywall and has completed all state apprenticeship requirements, and all similarly situated employees. But, because Fuller’s particular apprenticeship program was not established through union monopoly bargaining, he is being illegally denied access to employment.

“San Diego residents approved funding for schools, not payoffs to union bosses,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Public agencies owe it to the taxpayers to award contracts to those who will do the best work at the best price, not those who work with bureaucrats to shove a union down their workers’ throats.”

“These union bosses are trying to prevent hard-working, independent-minded employees like Wesley Fuller from providing for their families,” continued Gleason.

The National Labor Relations Board regional director in San Diego will now investigate the charges and determine whether to prosecute the unions before an administrative law judge.

Albion, Nebraska (October 1, 2009) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a local worker has filed unfair labor practice charges against the Communication Workers of America (CWA) Local 7476 union for blocking his attempt to stop paying union dues after resigning from union membership.

James Getzfred, an employee of Source Gas, resigned from the union and attempted to revoke authorization for union dues deduction on September 9, 2009. Instead of complying with his request, CWA bosses told Getzfred that he’d have to wait for a union-designated “window period” before he could opt out of union dues.

Nebraska is a Right to Work state, which means workers cannot be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment. Prior Supreme Court precedents have also established that employees have the right to resign from union membership at any time. However, CWA bosses now argue that an obscure legal technicality prevents workers who have resigned from union membership from ending dues payments until they explicitly opt-out during a union-prescribed window period.

Under federal law, this window period requirement can only be enforced if an employee explicitly agrees to it when he or she first authorizes the payroll deduction of union dues. So far, CWA bosses have been unable to produce Getzfred’s original authorization to demonstrate that he agreed to the CWA’s window period.

Moreover, the CWA local’s current dues authorization form includes no language that obligates union members to adhere to a window period if they resign from union membership and wish to stop paying union dues.

Getzfred’s charges seek an immediate end to further forced dues collection and a retroactive reimbursement of union dues from the date of his resignation. The charges also demand that CWA officials notify all Source Gas employees of their right to resign from union membership and stop paying union dues at any time.

“CWA union bosses seem more interested in exploiting rank-and-file workers and extracting union dues than respecting their rights,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “James Getzfred wants nothing to do with this union, but these union bosses are thumbing their noses at Nebraska’s popular, job-creating Right to Work law with the hope of preventing other workers from exercising their rights as well.”

Louisville, Kentucky (September 23, 2009) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, several Jefferson County educators have filed a federal class-action lawsuit against local and national teacher unions for a series of schemes designed to force unwilling educators into full-dues paying union membership.

The lawsuit alleges that union officials routinely blocked membership resignations for years at a time, automatically enrolled new teachers in the union without their consent, and used a collective bargaining scheme to force county teachers to pay union dues.

The teachers’ lawsuit, filed against the Jefferson County Teachers Association (JCTA) union and its national affiliate, the National Education Association (NEA), in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, 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 that informs public school employees of their right to refrain from membership.

The NEA is also named in the teachers’ suit because it encouraged JCTA officials to continue to block resignation attempts despite the concerns of local educators. Foundation attorneys believe that this lawsuit has the potential to deter similar NEA practices across the country by setting a favorable precedent under the First Amendment guaranteeing the right of teachers to resign from union membership at any time.

Currently, teachers employed in Jefferson County are automatically enrolled as union members and forced to pay union dues unless they explicitly register an objection to JCTA union officials. Moreover, teachers are only permitted to resign from formal union membership during a ten day-window period after an individual teacher’s contract is signed or after the union hierarchy agrees to a new contract with the local school board. If a teacher fails to register an objection to union membership within either period, he or she is forced to remain a union member until the expiration of the union’s five-year contract with the local school board. Many teachers report that JCTA officials never informed them of their right to refrain from joining the union in the first place.

Foundation attorneys believe that any collective bargaining agreement that forces educators to pay union dues to keep their jobs is illegal under state law. Moreover, the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent Abood v. Detroit Board of Education ensures that teachers and other public employees have the right to resign from union membership. Retaliation or discrimination against employees for deciding against belonging to a union is also illegal.

“The JCTA’s illegal policy has allowed union officials to hold teachers hostage for far too long,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “While we’re confident that the Foundation’s lawsuit will be successful, the best way to prevent future abuse of this nature is for Kentucky to adopt a Right to Work law. Doing so would make union membership and dues-payment strictly voluntary.”

Warwick, RI (September 23, 2009) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Kent Hospital nurse has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against a local nursing union for illegally attempting to coerce her and other employees into formal, full-dues paying membership.

The charges come just as the nurses are seeking an election to strip the United Nurses and Allied Professionals (UNAP) Local 5008 union hierarchy of all power to compel dues payments as a job condition.

In the 22 states with Right to Work protections, employees cannot be forced to pay any union dues. The U.S. Supreme Court held in the Foundation-won Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988) that union officials in states like Rhode Island, which do not have Right to Work laws, can lawfully compel nonmembers to pay union dues as a job condition, but not the part of dues spent for activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events. Union officials must also provide nonmembers with an independently audited breakdown of union expenditures, and nonmembers may challenge the calculation of the reduced fees.

Local 5008 recently disseminated a “Fact Sheet on Union Dues” to Jeanette Geary and other nurses at Kent Hospital. In the document, union officials told the employees that if they wish to exercise their right to refrain from union membership, they will pay only one dollar less per pay period than union members. But union officials never provided the nurses with the required independent audit of union expenditures necessary to determine whether they are being forced to pay more than allowed under law.

Foundation attorneys argue that Local 5008 union bosses have also implemented an illegal policy designed to force employees into “choosing” automatic deduction of monthly dues over the burdensome alternative of two lump sums paid semi-annually. Union officials have also informed the nurses that dues will be deducted automatically, even if they never authorized the deduction.

The National Labor Relations Board regional director in Boston will now investigate the charges and determine whether to prosecute Local 5008 before an administrative law judge. Geary is also spearheading a campaign to collect signatures from her fellow nurses to conduct a deauthorization election, which would remove the forced-dues clause from the contract.

“Sadly, skirting financial disclosure requirements and trying to coerce nurses like Jeanette Geary into union membership has become standard operating procedure for these union officials,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.