**Springfield, VA (November 20, 2007)** – Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, made the following statement in response to today’s granting of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Foundation-supported Chamber v. Brown appeal.

An en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit had reversed two of its earlier appellate rulings by a vote of 8-3, upholding a state law that will effectively force coercive union organizing upon employees of private companies who receive state funds. Foundation attorneys filed an amicus curiae (“friend of the court” brief) urging U.S. Supreme Court review.

“In a controversial decision with national implications, the activist Ninth Circuit in Chamber v. Brown upheld a California law which increases pressure on employees to join potentially unwanted unions.

“This special-interest state statute is pre-empted by federal labor law, which is supposed to protect employees from pressure to unionize by union officials and other entities. We’re thankful the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case.

“The practical effect is that employees of private employers wishing to accept funds from the state are denied truthful information regarding the downsides of unionization. Their employers could ultimately be blackballed from government contracts unless they clear the path for union organizers to recruit new forced-dues-paying union members. Moreover, union organizers will insist that the state law entitles them to sweeping access to company facilities, employees’ private personal information, and the power to sidestep the less-abusive secret ballot election process for determining whether employees actually want a union.

“California officials are using the heavy hand of government to trample upon workers’ rights. Because union hierarchies seem to be having difficulties persuading employees to join unions voluntarily, they have resorted to coercive tactics in order to maintain the flow of forced union dues.

“The National Right to Work Foundation denounces this rogue appellate ruling and applauds the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to review it.”

**Batavia, IL (November 2, 2007)** – The bus company First Group, Inc. and the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1028 have been hit with federal labor board charges for illegally bargaining over employees who the union does not even represent. First Group employee Russell Haasch filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) earlier this week with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys.

As Haasch details in his charges, ATU union officials have been negotiating a contract with First Group, despite the fact that Haasch and his coworkers had successfully ousted the union earlier this year. According to First Group’s website, on October 1 the UK-based transit company completed the purchase of Haasch’s employer, Laidlaw Transit.

In Spring 2007, Haasch collected signatures from an overwhelming majority of his co-workers and in June presented the petition to their employer Laidlaw Transit, which legally and properly ended its recognition of the ATU union as the monopoly bargaining agent for the approximately 160 employees. Only recently did Haasch and his co-workers realize that their new employer, First Group, was negotiating a contract with ATU officials, despite the fact that the employees had successfully shown that the union did not have their support.

According to the National Labor Relations Act, by bargaining over the contracts of employees that the union does not legally represent, the union and First Group are engaging in illegal “pre-recognition” bargaining. As part of their negotiations, the union is once again seeking a forced-dues clause in the contract that makes payment of union dues a job requirement. Indeed, union officials have been given access to First Group facilities and are now demanding that employees pay union dues or be fired.

“Union officials and First Group management are illegally attempting to force this unpopular union down employees’ throats,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “With the lack of respect these union officials have for the employees, it is not surprising that workers rejected the union last June.”

The unfair labor practice charges ask the NLRB to seek an injunction to immediately stop First Group from continuing to negotiate a contract with the rogue ATU union and to cease all demands for union dues. The NLRB Regional Director will now investigate the charges and decide whether to prosecute the charges and seek injunctive relief.

**Pomona, CA (October 31, 2007)** – A nurse at the Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center has filed unfair labor practice charges against the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 121RN after SEIU union officials illegally threatened her and her coworkers with jail and fines. The nurses wished to resign from formal union membership, cut off union dues, and continue working during any union-ordered strike.

The charges come after the collective bargaining contract at the hospital expired and after union officials ordered a five day strike during October.

In response to the intimidation, nurse Carole Jean Badertscher filed the class action charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys. The charges detail how union officials misled and threatened employees in violation of the nurses’ rights under federal labor law. The charges also cite that union officials violated their so-called “duty of fair representation,” which is intended to prevent union discrimination against employees.

In a particularly egregious violation of the employees’ rights, a top local union official threatened that nurses who defied the union’s strike order could be subject to fines and criminal penalties, including 90 days in jail. The California law referenced by union officials is clearly pre-empted by federal labor law establishing that workers can remain at their jobs and avoid all union disciplinary fines if they first resign from formal union membership.

Union officials also distributed a flier illegally misleading the nurses, claiming that the NLRB requires employees to continue paying compulsory union dues after the expiration of a contract. The flier told nurses that, when a new contract goes into effect, union officials could require all employees to pay “back dues,” implying that they could be fired if they didn’t pay.

“Union officials are shamelessly flouting federal law in an effort to intimidate these nurses into heeding the union’s unpopular demands to turn their backs on their patients,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Unfortunately, in states like California where there is no Right to Work law prohibiting compulsory unionism, union officials face little accountability.”

The NLRB’s Regional Office will now investigate the charges and decide whether to issue a formal complaint and prosecute the union for unfair labor practices.

**Butte, MT (October 29, 2007)** – A Kalispell-based employee of Hanson Trucking and Resin Haulers Inc. filed federal charges against the Teamsters Local 2 union to protect himself from illegal threats to his job.

Michael Weller, a timber trucker for the resin hauling company, filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with help from attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. The charges cite that Teamsters Local 2 union officials are attempting to collect ongoing and back forced union dues, and have failed to provide Weller with a verified audited breakdown of union chargeable and non-chargeable expenses, as required by law.

After learning of his right to refrain from formal union membership independent of Teamsters Local 2, Weller sent letters to union officials asserting his right not to be forced to pay more than the documented cost of monopoly bargaining. In response, Teamsters union officials acknowledged Weller’s request, but calculated that the mandatory dues requirement would be reduced by only 69 cents.

Moreover, although union officials failed to provide Weller with any of the legally-mandated financial disclosures, union officials sent Weller written notice that his position would be terminated if he failed to pay the reduced fees. Under duress, Weller had no choice but to pay hundreds of dollars in forced union dues by money order, just to keep his job.

“Union officials are making an example of Michael Weller in order to stifle dissent,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “In states like Montana where there is no Right to Work law to ensure payment of union dues is strictly voluntary, union officials commonly trample the rights of employees to keep their coffers filled.”

In the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck, the Court affirmed workers have the right to refrain from formal union membership and halt and reclaim the portion of forced union dues spent on activities unrelated to collective bargaining, such as union political activities. Unfortunately, they can still be forced to pay for monopoly bargaining costs, even if they do not want union “representation.” However, employees have the right to have an independent third party audit the union expenditures and verify that the percentage of dues that non-members are forced to pay does not include political spending and other non-collective bargaining expenses.

The NLRB’s Regional Office will now investigate the charges and decide whether to issue a formal complaint and prosecute the union.

**Springfield, VA (October 17, 2007)** – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation announced today that it has hired Derek A. Poteet, a member of the Virginia State Bar since 1997 and graduate of the Washington & Lee University School of Law in Lexington, Virginia.

“Derek A. Poteet brings to National Right to Work a real commitment to helping employees fight back against the abuses of compulsory unionism,” said Ray LaJeunesse, vice president and legal director of the National Right to Work Foundation.

As the newest of the Foundation’s eleven staff attorneys, Poteet will help build on the Foundation’s successful litigation record for union-abused workers that includes 13 cases at the United States Supreme Court. In the most recent case, National Right to Work staff attorneys represented 4,000 teachers in the case of Davenport v. WEA, in which the High Court unanimously agreed unions have “no constitutional right” to spend forced dues for politics.

A United States Marine Corps Reservist, Poteet was recently promoted to Major. He was called for active duty in 2005 and served in Iraq through 2006. While abroad, he conducted compliance inspections of U.S. and Iraqi detention facilities throughout Al Anbar province. Currently, he continues to serve as a Judge Advocate for the Marines.

Poteet brings superior discovery and litigation skills to the Foundation’s expert legal staff. As a law clerk for a federal judge, he helped to interpret and apply federal and state laws to specific cases. In serving with the Marines, he has also provided legal assistance to service members and their families.

Before joining the Foundation, Poteet served as an associate attorney at a private law firm, where he defended property rights and advised business clients on employment law. He is experienced in civil and criminal litigation in state and federal courts, and won reinstatement and full back pay for a state employee who was unjustly terminated.

Poteet also holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Virginia where he double majored in political and social thought as well as foreign affairs.

**Hollywood, CA (October 11, 2007)** – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Symphony on the Glen musician filed a federal charge today against the American Federation of Musicians (AFM) Local 47 responding to an ugly union campaign of intimidation, coercion, and retaliation against employees exercising their legal rights.

Sai-Ly Acosta, a violinist for the film score orchestra, filed a federal unfair labor practice charge at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after union officials enforced an illegal policy requiring all musicians to be “in good standing” with the union in order to practice in a union-owned rehearsal facility used by their orchestra. Union officials informed Acosta, who is not a formal member of the AFM union, she and others would be arrested if they attended rehearsal tonight.

Of course, musical groups require that all musicians, as a condition of employment, participate in certain rehearsals – many occurring in facilities owned by AFM Local 47. However, Acosta and several of her coworkers exercised their legal right to resign from formal union membership and pay a reduced fee to cover the cost of union bargaining. As a result, union officials are attempting to unlawfully prevent her from practicing with the orchestra. Union operatives have harassed and intimidated the dissenting musicians, calling them “scabs.”

“These thuggish actions by union officials are both despicable and illegal,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “But this union intimidation is all too common in states like California where there is no Right to Work law on the books.”

Under the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision in *Communications Workers v. Beck* and subsequent NLRB rulings, union officials cannot require formal union membership or the payment of union dues unrelated to collective bargaining as a condition of employment. Employees are also entitled to notice of their right to refrain from union membership, an independent audit of union expenditures, and notice of their right to object to paying for non-bargaining activities, such as union political activities.

Because Acosta and other musicians exercised their legal rights under *Beck*, they have been unlawfully targeted for retaliation. The unfair labor practice charge will be reviewed by the NLRB’s Regional Director who will decide whether to take the union to trial before a federal labor judge.

“No one should be forced to pay dues to an unwanted union just to get or keep their job,” continued Gleason.

**Butte, MT (October 10, 2007)** – In order to avoid federal prosecution by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a local union had no choice but to ink a settlement with several Safeway employees after union officials tried unlawfully to keep them from exercising their rights.

The settlement, secured by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, requires the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 4 union to reimburse Safeway Inc. (NYSE: SWY) employees’ forced union dues seizures plus interest, to stop threatening their jobs, and to honor employees’ resignations from formal union membership.

UFCW Local 4 officials must also stop “requiring employees’ resignation letters be notarized, mailed by certified mail, set forth case law citations, and be individually submitted.” UFCW union officials had previously rejected the grocery workers’ requests to resign from formal union membership after union officials said the requests did not meet the union’s bogus and illegal rules for resigning.

With help from National Right to Work attorneys, Safeway employees Gerald Rasmussen and Carla Crandall originally filed federal charges against the UFCW Local 4 union in April and May, respectively. After an initial investigation, the NLRB combined the complaints into one case. A hearing was scheduled for September 18, but in an eleventh-hour decision, union officials signed a settlement in order to avoid embarrassing federal prosecution.

“This is a victory for this group of courageous workers,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “But this ugly union intimidation and abuse will continue to plague workers in Montana because there is no Right to Work law to ensure that payment of union dues is strictly voluntary.”

The employees’ original charges cite that UFCW Local 4 union officials were attempting to enforce a compulsory unionism clause requiring employees to join or pay dues to the union or be fired from their jobs, despite a formal deauthorization election held in late April where a large majority of employees voted to strip union bosses of their forced unionism privileges. UFCW Local 4 union officials continue to challenge the election results.

After learning of their right to resign from formal union membership from sources independent of UFCW Local 4, Rasmussen, Crandall and other employees sent letters to union officials resigning from formal union membership. Union officials rejected their requests and never provided any of the legally-mandated financial disclosure statements to the Safeway employees.

In the Foundation-won *Communications Workers of America v. Beck* decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that employees laboring under the National Labor Relations Act are entitled to resign from formal union membership but can still be forced to pay for activities related to union monopoly bargaining. However, they cannot be compelled to pay for other costs such as union political activities.

**Pensacola, FL (October 2, 2007)** – After nearly a four year delay, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has agreed to prosecute the International Association of Machinists (IAM) union for requiring employees at Vertex Aerospace, LLC to object annually to prevent union officials from spending their compulsory union dues for political activities.

The case puts in the spotlight a common union tactic used to raise hundreds of millions of dollars in forced union dues spent on Big Labor’s political agenda.

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys helped Robert Prime, an employee at the Naval Air Station, originally file unfair labor practice charges in December 2003 against the IAM union, as well as District Lodge 75 and Local Lodge 2777. The charges allege that union officials violated his rights by forcing him to renew every single year his objection to funding union political advocacy. The NLRB has scheduled a hearing that will take place before an Administrative Law Judge on December 10.

In November 2003, Prime had filed an objection with IAM union officials to funding their political activities, as the Foundation-won Communications Workers of America v. Beck decision permits. The Beck decision recognized that workers have the right to refrain from formal union membership and cannot be forced to pay for activities unrelated to collective bargaining. However, when Prime asked union officials to honor his request as a “continuing objection,” IAM officials refused, claiming that Prime and his coworkers must object annually because they are not subject to the Railway Labor Act (RLA).

In 2000, a U.S. District Court struck down the IAM union’s nationwide policy requiring annual objections from employees seeking a rebate of dues spent for activities unrelated to collective bargaining. However, the ruling technically only applied to employees covered by the RLA. IAM union officials maintain that employees working under the National Labor Relations Act are, therefore, still required to object annually even though the policy is discriminatory and arbitrary, as three federal courts have held.

“Thumbing their noses at a federal court ruling, IAM union officials are forcing employees to jump over hurdles to stymie them from reclaiming their forced union dues,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

Florida’s highly-popular Right to Work law, on the books since 1944, is one of 22 state laws that secure the right of employees to decide for themselves whether or not to join or financially support a union. However, because Vertex Aerospace employees work on federal property under “exclusive federal jurisdiction,” the state’s Right to Work law does not protect those workers from being forced to pay union dues in order to keep their jobs.

Read the Complaint

**Washington, D.C. (October 2, 2007)** – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) voted 3-2 to overturn its policy of denying employees any access to a secret ballot vote over unionization after a union is recognized pursuant to the controversial “card check” organizing process.

The long-awaited ruling came in two high-profile cases brought by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys for employees at two automotive suppliers (Dana and Metaldyne) who found themselves organized by the United Auto Workers (UAW) union. In the future, the federal agency will give employees notice that they have 45 days after the recognition to file a decertification petition to obtain an election to vote out the unwanted union.

However, in a bizarre move that punishes the very employees who brought these cases, the NLRB majority decreed that its ruling would only apply prospectively. As a result, the forcibly unionized Dana and Metaldyne employees – as well as employees of other employers who had similarly filed decertification petitions after card-check campaigns – will not be allowed to toss out the unions imposed upon them.

The NLRB’s decision prospectively impacts the effect of so-called “neutrality” agreements, contracts between a union and an employer under which the employer agrees not to oppose unionization of its workers. Under these coercive agreements, employers typically also grant union operatives sweeping access to their workplaces, home addresses, and employees’ other personal information. These pacts also strip workers of the opportunity to a secret ballot election and often allow union officials to hold mandatory “captive audience” meetings to browbeat the employees to sign union cards that are counted as “votes” for unionization.

The NLRB majority pointed out, “card checks are less reliable because they lack secrecy and procedural safeguards… union card-solicitation campaigns have been accompanied by misinformation… workers sometimes sign union authorization cards…to get the person off their back.”

The NLRB ruling comes in the consolidated cases of employees at Dana Corporation in Upper Sandusky, Ohio, and Metaldyne in St. Marys, Pennsylvania, who filed decertification petitions (with 35 percent and more than 50 percent of employees signing, respectively) seeking elections to decide whether officials of the nation’s largest auto workers union truly enjoyed the support of a majority of employees and could lawfully act as their “exclusive representatives.” The employees filed these petitions after their employers had announced that they would recognize the union on the basis of signed cards. The NLRB Regional Directors dismissed the election petitions, and the employees appealed to the NLRB in Washington, D.C., in 2004.

“This is an encouraging step forward for employee freedom, but the Bush NLRB has been sitting on many other important employee rights cases for several years,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Meanwhile, there is no moral or legal justification for penalizing the very employees who brought these cases by barring them from throwing out these illegally imposed unions.”

Download the NLRB Decision

**Philadelphia, Pa. (September 19, 2007)** – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation today filed a motion in federal court seeking to inform more than an estimated 12,000 individuals that union organizers have surreptitiously violated their privacy rights under federal law.

The Foundation filed the motion to intervene in *Pichler v. UNITE* in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after the court ordered the union to pay damages because union organizers unlawfully used the license plate numbers of over 1,500 Cintas Corporation employees to access their personal information in official Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) records. Union operatives conducted an additional 12,100 searches on individuals who may be employees of other non-union companies targeted by the union. Those individuals are unaware of this illegal invasion of their privacy.

The *Pichler* lawsuit, currently on appeal by union lawyers at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, revealed that UNITE union organizers violated employee rights under the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) of 1994. That federal law bars anyone from using motor vehicle records to obtain individuals’ personal information with limited exceptions. The union must potentially pay $2,500 per violation if the District Court’s decision is affirmed.

Union organizers illegally obtained the home addresses of Cintas employees for the purpose of conducting “home visits” to pressure and browbeat those workers into signing union authorization cards. The union intended to use these cards to bypass the secret-ballot election process for determining whether the employees wanted to unionize.

The U.S. District Court determined that union operatives conducted surveillance of numerous parking lots used by workers, collected license plate numbers, and conducted more than 13,700 searches of driving records. Cintas employees were alarmed to learn of this invasion of their privacy and filed their successful class-action lawsuit against the notoriously abusive union.

The Foundation’s motion seeks to modify a protective order in the case, which paradoxically prevents any of these other 12,100 Americans from being notified about the violation of their rights. The Foundation is seeking the right to do a one-time mailing under court supervision to each citizen the union operatives targeted. Ultimately, those 12,100 victims could be entitled to over $30 million in liquidated damages from the UNITE union.

“Thousands of employees deserve to know that UNITE union organizers may have violated their privacy by rifling through their DMV records,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “Citizens should not be prevented from learning that union operatives are secretly using their private personal information.”

Download the motion