Seattle, WA (December 17, 2008) — A recent decision by a Washington State Court of Appeals, Division 2, has ruled union officials can be held liable for illegally spending teachers’ forced union dues under a now-effectively defunct campaign finance regulation.

The ruling means that thousands of Washington State teachers may receive restitution for the amount Washington Education Association (WEA) union officials illegally docked their paychecks to pay for union political expenditures. The ineffective campaign finance law at issue had been adopted in 1992 and has since been voided by the Washington State Legislature.

The teachers are receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys. In 2007, Foundation attorneys successfully brought the Davenport v. WEA case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which overturned an earlier Washington State Supreme Court decision using the campaign finance law to undermine the First Amendment. The state appeals court ruled Friday on a number of issues, including upholding the teachers’ tort claim for restitution and approving the certification of thousands of employees as a class.

Before it was gutted by amendment in 2007, the Washington law had required union officials to obtain the prior consent of nonunion public employees before spending their mandatory union dues on a small fraction of what the union actually spends on politics. According to an amicus brief filed by the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, the amount of political expenditures actually covered by the law was “miniscule… less than one quarter of one percent of the WEA’s total expenditures.” However, in striking down the law, the state Supreme Court had erroneously found a constitutional “right” for union officials to spend the money of non-union employees who are compelled to pay union dues as a condition of employment.

“Ineffective ‘paycheck protection’ campaign finance laws such as this have unfortunately opened a Pandora’s Box, creating an opportunity for activist courts to award new privileges to union officials and even to jeopardize state Right to Work laws,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “While the underlying law was deeply flawed, the National Right to Work Foundation had a duty to limit the broader collateral damage done to employees’ rights by the state court’s response and to fight for the return of dues illegally seized under the now totally ineffective law.”

“Ultimately, Right to Work laws are the only way to protect workers from the misuse of their funds. By making membership and the payment of dues entirely voluntary, Right to Work laws allow employees to prevent the theft in the first place,” stated Gleason.

Washington, DC (December 12, 2008) – Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, made the following statement today in response to United Auto Workers (UAW) union president Ron Gettelfinger’s angry lashing out on national television at the legal foundation’s efforts to defend workers from forced unionism abuse:

"How dare you blame the current debacle in the automotive business on efforts to give workers the right to join or not join a union. These problems have been caused by the forced unionism stranglehold you currently enjoy.

"Make no mistake; you will never get your hands on the list of the National Right to Work Foundation’s contributors. Over the years, hundreds of thousands of generous Americans have helped our organization provide free legal aid to the employee victims of your forced unionism hierarchy. We will NEVER allow these folks to be put into harm’s way by making their identities known to your goons."

Ron Gettelfinger held a press conference aired today on various television networks in which he implied the union hierarchy’s problems result from external factors, rather than forced unionism that has brought the Big Three to its knees. "We’ve [sic] also up against National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation who we don’t even know who they are, because we can’t find out who their contributors are," he announced.

Gettelfinger was referencing a 13-year legal battle by the UAW and 12 other international unions intended to force the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation to reveal the names and addresses of its contributors. During the litigation, union lawyers finally admitted they wanted to send the contributor list to local union chiefs all over the country. They wanted to make “discreet inquiries” about the contributors in their areas.

Ultimately this largest multi-union lawsuit in history ended in a loss for union lawyers, but not after lower courts had nearly thrown then-Foundation president Reed Larson in jail twice for defiance of court orders demanding release of the contributor list.

The Foundation’s support comes from all kinds of people — union members, nonunion employees, small business owners, charitable foundations and others. Many of them would be subjected to vicious retaliation if the union bosses could just learn their identities. Blacklisting, beatings, bombings, and arson are just a few of the tactics union “enforcers” use against those who oppose them.

With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a fourth grade teacher from Ohio has filed a federal suit against Ohio’s largest teacher union for religious discrimination:

Columbus, OH (December 4, 2008) – A fourth grade teacher from the Coldwater Exempted Village School District has filed a federal suit against the state’s largest teacher union for forcing her to pay compulsory union fees to fund the union whose activities violate her religious faith.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, providing the teacher with free legal aid, filed the suit this week in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.

Kathy Hart, an active member of the Catholic Church, has been a teacher in the Ohio public school system since August 1996. Because the public school she works in is unionized, she works under a collective bargaining agreement which forces her to pay compulsory union fees to the National Education Association (NEA) union and its state and local affiliates – the Ohio Education Association (OEA) union and the Coldwater Teachers Organization (CTO) union. Due to her faith, Hart objects to the unions’ positions on abortion and special rights for homosexuals.

Hart had asked that the union divert her compulsory fees to a charity, thereby accommodating her religious objections to supporting financially unions she believes to be involved in immoral activities.

Read the rest of the Foundation’s press release here.

Columbus, OH (December 4, 2008) – A fourth grade teacher from the Coldwater Exempted Village School District has filed a federal suit against the state’s largest teacher union for forcing her to pay compulsory union fees to fund the union whose activities violate her religious faith.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, providing the teacher with free legal aid, filed the suit this week in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.

Kathy Hart, an active member of the Catholic Church, has been a teacher in the Ohio public school system since August 1996. Because the public school she works in is unionized, she works under a collective bargaining agreement which forces her to pay compulsory union fees to the National Education Association (NEA) union and its state and local affiliates – the Ohio Education Association (OEA) union and the Coldwater Teachers Organization (CTO) union. Due to her faith, Hart objects to the unions’ positions on abortion and special rights for homosexuals.

Hart had asked that the union divert her compulsory fees to a charity, thereby accommodating her religious objections to supporting financially unions she believes to be involved in immoral activities.

NEA union officials agreed to allow Hart to redirect her compulsory union dues to a mutually agreed upon charity. However, OEA officials refused to accommodate Hart and used the CTO to collect forced union dues from her paycheck. In response, Hart filed charges with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging that the union officials’ actions were religious discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The EEOC authorized Hart in September to proceed with her own civil action against the OEA and CTO.

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys have helped Ohio teachers in dozens of cases over the last decade involving harassment by officials at the OEA union and its affiliates.

“OEA union bosses have a long and abusive record of violating employees’ rights by refusing to accommodate religious objectors in the workplace,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The OEA union hierarchy’s ugly policy of forcing teachers to fund unions which offend their consciences will continue until Ohio gives employees the protections of a Right to Work law.”

A Right to Work law secures the right of employees to decide whether or not to join or financially support a union. In the 22 states that have passed Right to Work laws, employees are free to follow their conscience and refrain from supporting an unwanted union without having to resort to costly litigation.

Pomona, California (November 25, 2008) – Attorneys for a Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center nurse announced they will appeal an erroneous administrative law judge ruling dismissing a federal complaint against a local union. Union officials had threatened non-striking nurses with financial penalties and even arrest for refusing to abandon their patients.

Federal labor prosecutors agreed with unfair labor practice charges brought by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys and found that Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 121RN officials had illegally coerced nurses in the exercise of their rights to refrain from union activity. The General Counsel of the NLRB formally brought the case before the federal labor law judge.

In May 2007, the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the hospital expired. SEIU officials later ordered a series of general strikes. Dozens of nurses resigned from formal union membership so they could continue treating their patients without facing retaliation by union officials. In response, union bosses menacingly disseminated information to nurses stating that, under a California “strikebreaker” law, they may be “subject to a fine of up to $1,000 and up to 90 days in jail” for refusing to join the strike and returning to work. SEIU officials further suggested to nurses that nonmembers would continue to owe compulsory union dues even though no contract containing a valid forced-dues clause was in effect.

Foundation attorneys helped Carole Jean Badertscher file the original unfair labor practice charges at the NLRB, and the General Counsel agreed that the Golden State’s “strikebreaker” law “coerced and intimidated employees from engaging in activities protected by the [National Labor Relations] Act,” which guarantees the right of nonmembers to work rather than strike. Moreover, the General Counsel agreed that the union bosses’ false insistence that nonmembers pay dues when no contract is in effect is also an unfair labor practice.

But Administrative Law Judge William G. Kocol dismissed the complaint, claiming that because none of the nurses could be legally classified as “professional strikebreakers,” the California law did not apply to them, and thus they should have ignored the threats. Also, according to the ALJ, union bosses did not violate the duty of fair representation because they “did not directly link continued dues payment with enforcement of a [forced-dues clause].”

“Unbelievably, the judge has effectively indicated that employees are expected to hire their own labor lawyers to help them read between the lines of union boss propaganda intended to coerce and intimidate them,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The fact remains that union bosses sought to mislead and pressure nurses into turning their backs on patients and continue to pay dues against their will.”

Foundation attorneys will file an appeal with the NLRB in Washington, DC.

With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, two Chemtura Corp. employees filed unfair labor practice charges against the United Steelworkers union:

Morgantown, WV (November 17, 2008) – National Right to Work Foundation attorneys have filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the United Steelworkers national union for two Morgantown workers for its illegal scheme to coerce them to pay full union dues.

Chemtura Corporation employs approximately 80 workers at its Morgantown factory who are “represented” by the USW. Because West Virginia is not a Right to Work state, nonmembers are forced to pay certain compulsory fees to the union, but only for activities which union bosses can prove are related to collective bargaining. Previous Foundation-won litigation has established that workers have the right to refuse formal union membership and that union officials may not charge nonmembers for activities like political activism, organizing, and member-only events.

The USW forces David Yost, Ronald Echegaray, and other similarly situated Chemtura employees to renew their objections to payment of full union dues in a 30-day window period each year. Nonmembers who do not annually renew their previous objections are suddenly assumed to be “non-objectors” and against their will and without their consent are compelled to pay full union dues or lose their jobs.

Read the rest of the Foundation’s press release here.

Morgantown, WV (November 17, 2008) – National Right to Work Foundation attorneys have filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the United Steelworkers national union for two Morgantown workers for its illegal scheme to coerce them to pay full union dues.

Chemtura Corporation employs approximately 80 workers at its Morgantown factory who are “represented” by the USW. Because West Virginia is not a Right to Work state, nonmembers are forced to pay certain compulsory fees to the union, but only for activities which union bosses can prove are related to collective bargaining. Previous Foundation-won litigation has established that workers have the right to refuse formal union membership and that union officials may not charge nonmembers for activities like political activism, organizing, and member-only events.

The USW forces David Yost, Ronald EchegarAy, and other similarly situated Chemtura employees to renew their objections to payment of full union dues in a 30-day window period each year. Nonmembers who do not annually renew their previous objections are suddenly assumed to be “non-objectors” and against their will and without their consent are compelled to pay full union dues or lose their jobs.

In contrast, union officials do not need to get new consents each year from union members, re-establishing that they want to remain members and continue to pay dues through payroll deduction. As the charges explain, the USW’s policy is discriminatory and “solely designed to burden objecting nonmembers.”

With its arbitrary “Nonmember Objection Procedure,” the USW has violated its duty to represent fairly nonmembers in good faith. Moreover, federal labor law does not grant certified unions the authority to convert nonmembers into “non-objectors” without their consent.

In June, Yost sent a letter to USW union bosses asserting his procedural rights under Communication Workers of America v. Beck and related cases. The Supreme Court has held that unions must provide nonmembers a statement breaking down the union’s expenditures, verified by an independent auditor, and the opportunity to challenge the basis of the fee. In his letter, Yost declared his intent to file unfair labor practice charges if the union did not consider his objection permanent and continuing. Echegary sent a similar letter in August, before his objection was to expire. In both instances, a USW lawyer replied that the employee would need to re-object each year.

“It is unbelievable that United Steelworkers union bosses expect nonmembers to follow these arbitrary and illegal union procedures,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.

In another egregious example of Top Down union organizing, California Nurse Association (CNA) union officials and Tenet Medical Corporation attempted to corral unwilling nurses into union ranks by agreeing to forgo federal supervision during unionization elections.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, several nurses filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Now we learn that the NLRB has decided to put the sham "elections" on hold pending an official investigation into the charges. Here’s an excerpt from the Foundation’s press release:

Federal labor prosecutors have blocked a so-called “consent election” sought by the Tenet Healthcare Corporation and the California Nurses Association (CNA) while the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) conducts an inquiry into the legality of a secret backroom deal entered into by Tenet and CNA officials.

The National Labor Relations Board’s Regional Director heeded the wishes of Houston-area nurses who filed unfair labor practice charges against Tenet and the CNA with assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation. The scheduled “consent election” would have determined whether the CNA became the monopoly bargaining agent of nurses at the Houston Northwest Medical Center.

Read the whole thing here.

For more on top-down organizing, check out the Foundation’s webpage on the subject.