ST. LOUIS, Mo. (June 11, 2001) — With assistance from a national legal aid foundation, a Culligan Water Conditioning employee today filed federal charges against the Saint Louis-based Teamsters Local 610. The union’s officials have been illegally attempting to have the worker fired from his job for withholding union dues spent on politics and other activities unrelated to collective bargaining.
National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed the unfair labor practice charges on behalf of Pete Lenhardt with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) charging that union officials illegally demanded that Culligan discharge Lenhardt for not paying full union dues, even though he became a nonmember of the union.
The union’s threats and demands violated the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court Communications Workers v. Beck decision, which holds that workers may resign from union membership and pay only for the union’s proven collective bargaining costs.
“Teamsters union officials must be held to account for bullying employees who do not support the union,” said Randy Wanke, Director of Legal Information for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal aid to victims of forced unionism abuse.
Before ordering his termination, Teamsters Local 610 officials had been unlawfully seizing full union dues from Lenhardt and other Culligan employees and demanding so-called “initiation fees” equal to the full amount paid by union members without notifying employees of their right to object to union membership and the payment of full dues.
In response to the Foundation-filed charge, Culligan notified Lenhardt that they would not dismiss him while his charge was before the NLRB. Foundation attorneys are also demanding that the union notify all bargaining unit employees of their rights.
Washington, D.C. (June 5, 2001) — Ironically complaining that President George W. Bush’s executive order imposes “substantial administrative burdens” on businesses, three unions and a federally funded union-established corporation filed suit against the Bush Administration. The suit seeks to prevent unionized employees of federal contractors from learning about their rights to be nonmembers and reclaim their forced union dues spent for politics.
The suit is likely to raise many eyebrows, as the same unions that have long claimed to be defenders of workplace rights are now suing to prevent employees from learning about workplace rights.
Executive Order 13201 simply requires federal contractors to post a standard workplace notice informing employees of their rights under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Communications Workers v. Beck, a case won by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys in 1988 establishing that employees cannot be compelled to formally join a union or pay dues spent for politics or any other activities unrelated to collective bargaining. Because of unions’ routine and systematic non-compliance with the law, a vast majority of unionized employees still do not know they have these rights, polls show.
The United Auto Workers (UAW) union, along with the UAW-Labor Employment and Training Corporation and two affiliates of the Office and Professional Employees International Union, quietly filed the suit last month in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and several other high-ranking Administration officials.
National Right to Work Foundation attorneys are preparing to intervene in defense of the executive order on behalf of workers who have been lied to about their rights or outright threatened by union officials (including UAW officials) when they tried to reclaim their forced dues spent on electioneering and the like.
“Afraid that they would face a grassroots revolt, union bosses don’t want working Americans to find out that they can stop funding Big Labor’s massive political machine,” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “This multi-union lawsuit demonstrates the total hypocrisy of union officials’ claims that they are genuinely concerned about employee rights.”
Signed on February 17, 2001, the executive order affects a small segment of the 12 million American employees compelled to pay union dues as a condition of employment, as it only requires companies with federal contracts to inform workers of their Beck rights by posting workplace notices. Bush’s father issued a similar executive order in April of 1992 that was immediately revoked at the request of union officials as President Clinton took office in 1993. Additionally, the Clinton National Labor Relations Board stonewalled the enforcement of these precious employee protections, often leaving many cases languishing within the bureaucracy for six or more years.
Brainerd, Minn. (May 31, 2001) — In a 66 to 28 vote, employees at Bang Printing stripped the Graphic Communications International Union Upper Midwest Local 1-M of the power to get employees fired for refusing to financially support the union as non-members.
Carole Kraklau and other employees received free legal advice from attorneys with the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) requesting that the deauthorization election be conducted. The results of that vote were announced today.
The decisive vote ends the union’s power to force workers to pay union dues, much of which is spent for politics, lobbying, social activities, and other activities claimed to be related to “representing” the employees. Employees who refused to pay the dues were threatened with discharge.
“This landslide victory shows that when employees are given the opportunity to decide how much power union officials have over them, they choose freedom,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
By deauthorizing the union in the NLRB election, employees are now free to decide for themselves whether to join or financially support the union. The union is now forced to justify to individual employees why it deserves the support of the rank-and-file workers.
WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 30, 2001) — The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation announced that approximately 71,000 communications workers are today being offered an opportunity to reclaim approximately $70 million in forced union dues illegally seized over nine years by the Communications Workers of America (CWA) union for politics.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia forced CWA union officials to mail the rebate notice pursuant to the 1998 Foundation-won Abrams v. CWA ruling. In Abrams, the court found that union officials broke the law by failing to give workers lawful notice of their right to object to payment of full union dues, including dues spent for partisan political activities.
In the Foundation’s landmark case CWA v. Beck (1988), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that no worker could be lawfully forced to become a formal, full-dues-paying union member and pay for any activities unrelated to collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment.
“CWA union officials should never have taken this money in the first place,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Now they must return millions of dollars.”
The union must allow workers 30 days to retroactively request refunds, plus interest, for all dues between 1987 and 1995 that were used for purposes, such as politics, other than collective bargaining. Workers who think they might be eligible for the refund should contact the Foundation at 1-888-789-4255.
The CWA union’s disclosure over those years admitted that around 25 percent of full dues were not used for collective bargaining. This portion amounts to – on average – about $100 per worker, per year, before interest. Thus, many of the affected workers may be eligible for rebates up to as much as $900 for the full nine years. The court also ordered union officials to pay some 120,000 workers more than $500,000 in damages.
Kenneth Abrams and three other workers at Bell Systems-affiliated companies from Maryland and New Jersey originally filed the suit in 1987 in opposition to the union’s financing of its political agenda.
Largo, Maryland (May 17, 2001) — Denise Mack has filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against local union officials for demanding that she be fired for refusing to give in to their illegal demands for more than $1,000 in forced union dues.
Last month, Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU), Local 2 officials ordered Mack to pay what they called “back dues” for a two-year period in which she worked at a Kaiser Permanente Medical Group office in Virginia. But under Virginia’s Right to Work law, there was no requirement that Mack, who was not a member of the union, pay any union dues during that period.
National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed the charges on behalf of Mack, now employed at Kaiser Permanente’s Largo, Maryland, office, with the National Labor Relations Board against the OPEIU Local 2.
“This is a flagrant attempt by union officials to swindle Mack and skirt Virginia’s highly popular Right to Work law,” said Randy Wanke, Director of Legal Information for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “It’s also obviously designed to send a message to Kaiser Permanente employees in Virginia – ‘pay up now, or we’ll get the money from you when you’re transferred to Maryland.'”
The OPEIU Local 2 union has “exclusive representation” power over Kaiser Permanente’s Virginia and Maryland employees. Last December, Mack was transferred to Maryland where union officials began demanding forced union dues from her paycheck. Maryland is not a Right to Work state. On April 18, an OPEIU Local 2 union official sent Mack a letter demanding that she pay a total of $1,153.04 in reinstatement fees and “back union dues” from February 1998 – February 2000, a time period in which she worked in Virginia, or be fired.
Foundation attorneys are seeking an immediate injunction to stop OPEIU Local 2 union officials from seizing any dues or from having Mack fired. They are also seeking to force the union to return any forced dues seized as a result of their illegal threats and to have union officials held in contempt for violating an earlier NLRB judgment against them.
SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. (May 17, 2001) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today overturned the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) precedent-setting mandate that employees fund union organizing drives nationwide with their forced union dues.
Attorneys with the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation convinced the unanimous appellate court panel to overturn the NLRB’s decision in Meijer (which the Board issued after more than 10 years of inexplicable delay) on the basis that it violated U.S. Supreme Court precedent and thereby would have forced the 7.8 million American employees who work in compulsory union shops to pay union organizing expenses or lose their jobs.
Organizing expenses often exceed 20 percent of a union’s budget.
“The notoriously biased NLRB has again been caught red-handed fabricating its own vision for labor relations favoring union officials even when it violates clear Supreme Court precedent,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, an organization that provides free legal aid to victims of forced unionism abuse.
The ruling comes one day after President George W. Bush promoted Board member Peter Hurtgen to NLRB Chairman – even though he signed the NLRB’s anti-employee Meijer ruling.
The unanimous three-judge panel on Ninth Circuit agreed that the NLRB’s decision directly violates the previous rulings of the Supreme Court. Under the Court’s 1988 ruling in Communications Workers v. Beck, a case brought by Foundation attorneys, employees may not be forced to pay for union political activities and other activities unrelated to collective bargaining, contract negotiation, or grievance adjustment. In the Foundation-won precedents Ellis v. Railway Clerks and Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association, the High Court determined that union organizing expenses were clearly unrelated to collective bargaining, and thus employees who are not members of the union could not be forced to financially support this type of advocacy activity.
In Meijer, the Board attempted to whitewash the abuse of three grocery store employees Phillip Mulder, Charles Buck, and Leon Gibbons, who originally filed the case (with the help of Foundation attorneys) against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union in Michigan.
The National Labor Relations Board, especially under President Clinton, has a long history of ruling against employees who chose not to join or support unions. Previous appellate court rulings in this area of law have chastised the Board for its “administrative arrogance” and labeled its decisions “not rational.”
ALGOMA, Wis. (May 14, 2001) — Nine Olsonite Corporation employees today filed federal charges against the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners union Local 1521 for refusing to honor their written objections to financially supporting the union.
The charges, filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) state that Local 1521 officials illegally seized full union dues from the objecting nonmembers and arbitrarily rejected their objection letters because of a technicality.
“These independent-minded employees don’t want their hard-earned dollars going into the union’s militant political and organizing campaigns,” said Randy Wanke, Director of Legal Information for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable organization that is providing free legal aid to the employees.
Olsonite, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of toilet seats, signed a collective bargaining agreement with the union requiring all employees to pay the union a so-called agency fee – even when the employees have no desire to associate with the union.
But under numerous federal statutes and U.S. Supreme Court precedents, including the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck decision, union officials cannot compel workers to become formal union members or pay full dues. Under Beck, objecting nonmembers may halt and reclaim all forced union dues used for activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as political action.
National Right to Work Foundation attorneys are demanding that the NLRB enforce the Beck decision by striking down the Carpenters union’s unlawful practices of seizing political money from nonmembers and refusing their objections.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (May 8, 2001) — The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California has ruled that the California State Employees Association (CSEA) union must return approximately $3 million in forced union dues illegally seized from the paychecks of more than 37,000 employees throughout the state.
“This ruling sends a clear message to Big Labor in California that they can no longer violate the rights of employees with impunity,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation.
In its ruling, the District Court found that CSEA union officials illegally seized forced union dues from employees without providing a proper independently audited financial disclosure of union expenditures as required by the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson decision.
“Fearing that employees will learn how their dues are spent, union officials go to great lengths to hide the true extent of their political spending,” said Gleason.
The court ruled that CSEA union officials must return to all nonmembers 20 percent, plus interest, of all forced dues seized in the 1999 “fee-payer year.” (Union officials seized approximately $1.1 million per month from 37,000 employees over 13 months.)
The District Court’s ruling came in response to a class-action lawsuit filed by Christine Cummings of Sacramento and seven other state employees. The lawsuit was filed in November 1999, with the assistance of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys on behalf of all state government workers in State Bargaining Units 1, 3, 4, 11, 14, 15, 17, 20, and 21 who have declined to join the union or who have joined since the union began enforcing its “forced-share fee” contract, which was signed by Governor Davis on October 10, 1999.
Washington, DC (April 30, 2001) — The United States Supreme Court today rejected an attempt by International Association of Machinists (IAM) union lawyers to gut Virginia’s highly popular Right to Work law, a measure that prohibits forced unionism.
The ruling today ensures a broader application of Virginia’s Right to Work law as well as the payment of $135,000 in damages to the union-abused employee.
“IAM union lawyers so despise employee freedom and Virginia’s Right to Work law, they took their crusade all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason.
The High Court rejected IAM union lawyers’ petition for writ of certiorari, refusing to review a Foundation-won Virginia Supreme Court ruling in favor of Frederick Pusey who was fired for refusing to support the IAM union. IAM union officials had forced the firing of Pusey claiming that Virginia’s Right to Work law somehow did not apply to workers on NASA’s Wallops Island facility.
In some cases, federal property clearly is under exclusive federal jurisdiction, which precludes the application of state Right to Work laws. But in the Pusey case, union lawyers’ claim of federal enclave jurisdiction was based on a 1940 grant of federal jurisdiction to build and operate an air base to defend Norfolk’s naval facility during World War II.
Notwithstanding the fact that the U.S. Navy had abandoned the airfield and left the area in 1959, the union lawyers argued that it remained an exclusive federal enclave. After Foundation attorneys sued both the IAM union and Pusey’s employer, Accomack County Circuit Court Judge Glen Tyler rejected the union argument as “not credible,” finding that any claim to exclusive federal jurisdiction had long since lapsed. In December 1999, a jury ordered the union to pay Pusey $135,000 in damages and back pay. Last year, by refusing to hear an appeal from union lawyers to throw out the lower court’s ruling, the state’s highest court upheld the damage award to Pusey. Union lawyers almost immediately appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Washington, D.C. (April 30, 2001) — As Big Labor today holds nationwide campaign-style political rallies criticizing President George W. Bush’s first 100 days in office, National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason reminded Americans of the illegitimacy of Big Labor political power.
“Big Labor’s political clout is fueled by union bosses’ inordinate ability to seize forced union dues from millions of hardworking Americans as a condition of employment,” said Gleason. “Union officials are pushing a political agenda that’s out of step with the working men and women forced to foot the bill.”
To highlight this point, Gleason noted that while Big Labor has devoted the vast majority of its political resources in the last 100 days to bashing the new president, almost 40 percent of union members voted for President Bush in the last election.
Meanwhile, a recent Zogby poll shows that more than 55 percent of union members favor the Bush tax cut plan.
Big Labor’s campaign against President Bush is an extension of its role in the 2000 election campaign, in which it poured unprecedented amounts of workers’ forced-dues money into an intense “ground war” costing an estimated $800 million. And when the election came down to recounting Florida’s ballots, Big Labor sent an army of union militants into the state in an attempt to change the election’s outcome.