Worker charges state UAW union bosses and GM officials ignored multiple requests from worker to stop funding union political activities

Rochester, NY (January 25, 2022) – With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Rochester General Motors employee Roger Clemons has successfully forced United Auto Workers (UAW) union bosses at his workplace to stop illegally funneling money from his paycheck into union politics. Clemons filed federal charges with Foundation aid in September 2021 against UAW Local 1097 and the UAW’s international hierarchy, asserting that union agents ignored his requests to opt-out of funding the union’s political agenda.

A Foundation-won settlement now forces UAW international and local officials to “make whole…Roger Clemons for all dues and fees” that were deducted from his paycheck in violation of the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision. Beck forbids union officials from forcing workers under their control to fund union politics and other union expenses unrelated to the union’s core bargaining functions.

Because New York State lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, union officials can still legally force workers to pay some union fees under threat of termination. In Right to Work states, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.

Clemons stated in his September 2021 charge against UAW Local 1097 officials that UAW officials had a history of flouting his Beck rights, failing to reduce his union dues even after he ended his union membership and became a “Beck objector” in October 2019. “Only after Mr. Clemons filed an [earlier] unfair labor practice charge…did the union comply with the requirements of the law,” the charge noted, detailing that union officials finally sent him rebate checks in June and July 2020 for excess dues they took from his paycheck.

However, UAW officials continued to create obstacles for Mr. Clemons’ Beck rights. The September 2021 charge also asserted that despite Clemons’ renewing his Beck objection in October 2020, he then did not receive “a single rebate check or a reduction in the dues deducted from his wages” for almost a year. UAW and GM officials both ignored multiple attempts at correspondence from him on this issue, the charge noted.

The charge contended that these actions violated Mr. Clemons’ rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, which protects individual employees’ rights to abstain “from any or all of” union activities. General Motors, Clemons’ employer, was also charged for its role in enforcing the illegal dues deductions.

The settlement now forbids UAW officials from “accept[ing] dues or fees which have been deducted from the paycheck of Roger Clemons, or any other Beck objector, which are in excess of the amount we can lawfully charge to Beck objectors.” UAW officials also are required to return dues that they seized from Clemons in excess of the reduced Beck amount.

Union officials devote enormous sums to political activity. A report from the National Institute for Labor Relations Research (NILRR) released in 2021 revealed that union officials’ own Department of Labor filings show around $2 billion in political spending during the 2020 cycle, primarily from dues-stocked union general treasuries. However, other estimates strongly suggest that actual union spending on political and lobbying activities topped $12 billion.

“Rank-and-file workers should know they have a right to refuse to fund union politics, especially with union political spending in 2020 having approached record numbers and midterm elections coming up,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Workers under UAW control, like Mr. Clemons, have special reason to be on guard, given the UAW’s perennial interest in politics and corruption at the very top levels of the UAW hierarchy, which has landed at least 10 former UAW honchos in jail primarily for misuse of worker funds.”

“No American worker should be forced to subsidize any union boss political advocacy and the National Right to Work Foundation is proud to assist workers seeking to exercise their right to cut off financial support for union politics they oppose,” added Mix.

Appellate panel’s November decision in case signaled desire to revisit precedent that subjects workers to unwanted unionization

Las Vegas, NV (January 21, 2022) – In late 2019, a large majority of the workers at Red Rock Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada voted “no” to unionization, but a federal district court judge ordered their employer to bargain with union officials anyway. On Thursday, with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, casino employee Raynell Teske again backed an effort to overturn the judge’s order.

In August 2021, the casino appealed the district judge’s order to a three judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Teske then filed an amicus brief with Foundation legal aid arguing the district judge was wrong to impose the union on her and the other workers who made it clear in their secret-ballot election that they rejected unionization.

On November 26, 2021, the panel declined to overturn the lower court’s decision, citing binding Ninth Circuit precedent. But all three judges issued a concurring opinion saying they disagreed with that precedent, and signaled they would be willing to overturn it if the issue came before a Ninth Circuit en banc panel. Red Rock petitioned for an en banc rehearing, and Teske’s attorneys again filed an amicus brief on Thursday urging the court to rehear the case and overturn the district judge’s mandate.

The situation at Red Rock began in December 2019, when the National Labor Relations Board held a secret ballot election on whether to unionize Red Rock. A sizable majority of employees rejected union officials’ effort to become their monopoly bargaining representatives. Despite that vote, NLRB Region 28 Director Cornele Overstreet filed a federal court injunction action seeking to have the union imposed over the workers’ objections.

On July 20, 2021, District Judge Gloria Navarro agreed with the NLRB Director’s request, and issued a “Gissel” order forcing Red Rock to bargain with union officials despite the employees’ vote against unionization. The judge said the order was justified because, before the vote, union officials claimed that a majority of workers had signed union authorization cards.

Teske’s amicus brief argues those “card check” signatures are unreliable evidence of union support, and not reason enough to conclude the union ever had majority support. She contends the level of union support was tested fairly by the secret-ballot election, in which workers voted 627-534 against unionization. As the NLRB and federal courts have recognized in other cases, secret ballots are a more reliable way of gauging worker support for a union, because workers are often pressured, harassed, or misled by union organizers into signing cards.

Unions themselves know that “card check” signatures do not indicate solid worker support. The AFL-CIO admitted in its 1989 organizing handbook that it needed at least 75% card check support before having even a 50-50 chance of winning a secret ballot election. An earlier union guidebook acknowledged that some workers sign cards just to “get the union off my back.”

Teske’s brief argues the union’s possession of so-called “cards” is an insufficient legal basis for imposing unionization, especially after a secret ballot election which the union lost. It agrees with the employer that the “Gissel” order should be overturned, and that Teske and her coworkers should not be subjected to monopoly bargaining by a union they rejected in an NLRB-supervised secret ballot election.

“Ms. Teske and her coworkers voted decisively against unionization, but an Obama-appointed judge imposed it on them anyway,” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “‘Card Check’ unionization is widely accepted as unreliable, especially compared to an NLRB-supervised secret ballot election. There are countless examples of workers being pressured, misled and even bribed to sign union cards.”

“There is no reason why a district court judge should be able to substitute the wishes of NLRB bureaucrats for the choice workers already made at the ballot box. The Ninth Circuit should promptly convene an en banc panel and overturn Judge Navarro’s order that blatantly violates the rights of rank-and-file workers,” added Mix.

Despite union boss-ordered strike, all 8,000 affected King Soopers employees are free to exercise their right to return to work

Denver, Colorado (January 20, 2022) – Today, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation issued a special legal notice for workers affected by a strike at the King Soopers grocery chain in Colorado ordered by United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union officials.

According to news reports, the UFCW has struck against King Soopers grocery stores for over a week, impacting more than 8,000 employees. The Foundation’s legal notice informs these affected workers of the rights union officials often hide, including that the workers have the right to continue to work to support their families.

Importantly, the notice gives workers who want to exercise their right to work information on how to avoid fines and punishment that could be imposed by union officials.

“The situation raises serious concerns for employees who believe there is much to lose from a union-ordered strike,” the legal notice reads. “That is why workers frequently contact the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation to learn how they can avoid fines and other oppressive union discipline for continuing to report to work.

The Foundation’s special legal notice highlights workers’ rights to resign union membership and to revoke their union dues check-offs. The notice also provides helpful information for removing an unaccountable union from a workplace by using a decertification petition to obtain a secret ballot election.

The National Right to Work Foundation is the nation’s premier organization exclusively dedicated to providing free legal assistance to employee victims of forced unionism abuse. The full notice can be found at: https://www.nrtw.org/king-soopers-legal-notice/

“Workers always have the right to continue to work during a strike, despite what union officials may tell them or try to pressure them into doing,” National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix said. “This legal notice reflects the Foundation’s decades-long commitment to offering free legal aid to workers to protect them from union bosses’ coercive tactics which regularly go hand-in-hand with union strike demands.”

Charges come after hundreds of nurses backed petition for election to oust MNA union from St. Vincent, resulting in vote scheduled for February 4

Worcester, MA (January 13, 2022) – St. Vincent Hospital nurse Regina Renaud has hit the Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA) union at the facility with federal charges, asserting that union officials are illegally demanding nurses pay union dues for time periods when there was no contract in effect between the hospital and union. Renaud filed the charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.

Renaud’s charges come as hundreds of St. Vincent Hospital nurses have requested a vote whether to remove the MNA union from the facility. During a more than 300-day strike ordered by MNA union officials that finally concluded in early January, St. Vincent nurse Richard Avola gathered signatures from enough of his coworkers to prompt the NLRB to arrange such an election, and on January 11 an agreement was reached scheduling the election to begin on February 4. The disastrous strike clearly divided the nurses, the hospital, the community, and the patients.

Media reports indicate that union militants harassed and bullied nurses who returned to the hospital to care for patients during the protracted strike. Union partisans reportedly put photographs of working nurses on strike paraphernalia and took illicit pictures of nurses’ license plates, among other tactics. Despite credible reports of union harassment of nurses who exercised their right to work, high-profile elected officials including U.S. Senators Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren expressed support for the union boss-ordered strike.

Renaud’s charge reports that she is not an MNA member but is still forced to pay a portion of full union dues to keep her job. In states like Massachusetts that lack Right to Work protections, even workers who refuse full union membership can be forced to pay money to union officials to stay employed. However, this requirement is suspended in the absence of a monopoly bargaining contract between an employer and union. In Right to Work states, union membership and financial support are always strictly voluntary.

Renaud’s charge notes that, during the strike, no contract was in effect between MNA and St. Vincent management and “[a]s a matter of law the Charging Party and other similarly situated employees owed no dues or fees to the MNA during that contract hiatus.” However, on January 5, 2022, MNA sent bills to Renaud and other nurses who are not union members, ordering them to pay dues for a time period that included the contract hiatus.

“Thus, MNA is demanding and attempting to collect retroactive dues for several past months in which the Charging Party and other similarly situated nurses did not owe any dues and could not legally be required to pay such dues as a condition of employment…,” the Unfair Labor Practice charge states.

“In the aftermath of the long-drawn-out MNA boss-ordered strike on St. Vincent Hospital, evidence is rapidly emerging on the coercion and retaliation that union officials inflicted on the very nurses they claim to represent,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Ms. Renaud’s charges show that MNA officials ignored even the most basic legal protections for workers who do not wish to financially support a union.”

“St. Vincent Hospital nurses are fully justified in exercising their right to vote out MNA union officials. Any nurses who encounter union attempts to infringe on that right or who experienced other MNA malfeasance should reach out to the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid,” Mix added.

CUNY professors challenge New York State law that forces them to be represented by union hierarchy that ostracizes and discriminates against them

New York, NY (January 13, 2022) – Six City University of New York (CUNY) professors have filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Professional Staff Congress (PSC) union and others. The suit challenges the New York State law (“Taylor Law”) that PSC union officials use to force the professors under their monopoly “representation,” even though none of the professors are union members and all wish to dissociate completely from the union due to its extreme ideology and poor representation. The professors are receiving free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and The Fairness Center.

According to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, plaintiffs Avraham Goldstein, Michael Goldstein, Frimette Kass-Shraibman, Mitchell Langbert, Jeffrey Lax, and Maria Pagano oppose PSC “based largely on its ideological and political advocacy” and their dissatisfaction with the union’s exclusive control over their working conditions. The complaint further details that “[a]ll but one of the plaintiffs are Jewish,” and several chose to dissociate from PSC because of a June 2021 union resolution that “Plaintiffs view as anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish, and anti-Israel,” as well as other actions taken “in a manner that harms the Jewish plaintiffs and singles them out for opprobrium, hatred, and harassment based on their religious, ethnic, and/or moral beliefs and identity.”

Also named as defendants in the lawsuit are CUNY, New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, and New York Public Employee Relations Board (PERB) Chairman John Wirenius, for the state’s role in enforcing the union’s monopoly “representation.” The suit notes that “[d]espite Plaintiffs’ resignations from membership in PSC, Defendants…, acting in concert and under color of state law, force all Plaintiffs to continue to utilize PSC as their exclusive bargaining representative.”

Lawsuit: Jewish Professors and Others Compelled to Fund, Associate with Union Even After Bullying and Threats

The complaint recounts the various ways plaintiffs report being discriminated against by union and university agents. It says that Prof. Michael Goldstein “has experienced anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist attacks from members of PSC, including what he sees as bullying, harassment, destruction of property, calls for him to be fired, organization of student attacks against him, and threats against him and his family.” Goldstein now has a guard accompany him on campus, the complaint notes.

Prof. Lax, the complaint says, already received in a separate case a letter of determination from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) “that CUNY and PSC leaders discriminated against him, retaliated against him, and subjected him to a hostile work environment on the basis of religion.” Prof. Lax “has felt marginalized and ostracized by PSC because the union has made it clear that Jews who support the Jewish homeland, the State of Israel, are not welcome,” the complaint reads.

The lawsuit asserts that the PSC union, acting under the Taylor Law, is violating the professors’ First Amendment right of free association by compelling them “to associate with PSC, and to therefore be associated with PSC’s speech and PSC positions with which Plaintiffs vehemently disagree and believe to be anti-Semitic and anti-Israel.”

The lawsuit also notes that the professors are similarly being forced to associate with CUNY employees in the PSC union “bargaining unit” who “do not share their political views and who espouse views Plaintiffs believe to be anti-Semitic or anti-Israel,” another violation of their First Amendment rights. Additionally, the plaintiffs are “forced into the same bargaining unit with CUNY instructional staff, such as part-time adjuncts, whose employment interests diverge from their own.”

The complaint contends finally that PSC union bosses are violating the First Amendment as detailed in the 2018 National Right to Work Foundation-won Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision, in which the Justices ruled it a First Amendment violation to force public employees to fund union activities as a condition of keeping their jobs, or to take union dues from public employees’ paychecks without their individual and affirmative consent.

Although Professors Avraham Goldstein, Kass-Shraibman, and Langbert each resigned their union memberships and attempted to cut off dues, the complaint explains that “Defendants PSC and the City or DiNapoli have taken and continue to take and/or have accepted and continue to accept union dues from certain Plaintiffs’ wages as a condition of employment…” in violation of Janus.

Suit Seeks Overturn of New York State Law Forcing Union Power on Professors, Damages

The lawsuit seeks to stop the defendants from “certifying or recognizing PSC, or any other union, as Plaintiffs’ exclusive representative without their consent” and “enforcing any provisions…that require Plaintiffs to provide financial support to PSC.” It also demands that the court declare “Section 204 of the Taylor Law…unconstitutional under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to the extent that it requires or authorizes PSC to be Plaintiffs’ exclusive representative…”

Also sought are refunds of the “dues seized from the wages of Plaintiffs A. Goldstein, Kass-Shraibman, and Langbert” in violation of their First Amendment Janus rights and compensatory damages for “Defendants’ unlawful interference with and deprivation” of the professors’ constitutional rights.

“By forcing these professors into a union collective against their will, the state of New York mandates that they associate with union officials and other union members who take positions that are deeply offensive to these professors’ most fundamental beliefs,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Going as far back as the 1944 Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railway Co decision, the Supreme Court has recognized that union bosses misuse their government-granted monopoly bargaining powers to take offensive positions that are directly contrary to the interests of many employees who are forced under a union’s so-called ‘representation’ against their will.”

“New York State’s Taylor Law authorizes such unconscionable compulsion. It is time federal courts fully protect the rights of government employees to freely exercise their freedom to dissociate from an unwanted union, whether their objections are religious, cultural, financial, or otherwise,” added Mix.

Employees voted nearly 2-1 to remove unwanted Teamsters ‘representation’

Atchison, KS (January 12, 2022) – Distribution center workers at Blish-Mize, a wholesale hardware distributor in Atchison, Kansas, voted to remove Teamsters Local 696 union officials from their workplace. With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Diane Dame, a Blish-Mize employee, filed a decertification petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The petition bore the signatures of enough of Dame’s coworkers to trigger an NLRB-supervised decertification election, during which a large majority of the employees voted to oust Teamsters officials from their workplace.

Yesterday, NLRB regional officials tallied the ballots and announced the workers had voted 26-14 to remove the Teamsters. Now, barring any legal challenges from Teamsters bosses, the workers at this location will no longer be subject to union monopoly control.

In the past year alone, Foundation attorneys helped numerous workers remove unwanted Teamsters officials from workplaces across the country. Thanks to “blocking charge” reforms adopted by the Trump NLRB in 2020 at the Foundation’s urging, workers have been able to act on their desire to oust unpopular union officials with far fewer delays.

The “blocking charge” reforms prevent a union’s unfair labor practice charges against employers from halting decertification elections. Now, except in extraordinary circumstances, even if charges are filed, employees still have a chance to vote immediately and know the results. Before the reforms went into effect, even charges that ultimately proved meritless could delay an election for months or years.

“Diane Dame and her coworkers exercised their right to free themselves from unwanted Teamsters boss control,” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “We hope that Teamsters officials respect the choice made by the workers they claim to represent, and don’t resort to legal tricks to try to remain in power in a workplace where it’s clear they aren’t wanted.”

Carpentersville firefighters collected enough signatures for election whether to boot SEIU, but union officials are now attempting to block the vote

Chicago, IL (January 10, 2022) – With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Village of Carpentersville firefighters are defending their right to remove unpopular Service Employees International Union (SEIU) officials from power at their workplace. Leading the effort is Carpentersville firefighter Nick Salzmann, who submitted a decertification petition to the Illinois Labor Relations Board (ILRB) seeking an employee vote whether to oust the union.

The ILRB is the Illinois state agency responsible for adjudicating workplace disputes between union officials, Illinois government agencies, and Illinois public employees. Although the ILRB was prepared to schedule a decertification vote for later this month in response to Salzmann and his coworkers’ petition, SEIU union bosses levied “blocking charges” against Village of Carpentersville officials in an attempt to stall the vote. Foundation attorneys are now assisting Salzmann in opposing the delay.

SEIU union officials control contracts for all part-time firefighters in Carpentersville, including Salzmann and his colleagues. Salzmann in September 2021 submitted enough employee signatures to trigger the decertification election under state law. However, SEIU officials seek to block the employee action citing an unrelated incident that occurred after the employees’ petition was filed.

Foundation staff attorneys regularly help rank-and-file employees exercise their right to boot unwanted union officials out of their workplaces. In the past year alone, the Foundation successfully aided Desert Springs Hospital Medical Center technicians in Las Vegas, Rush University maintenance workers in Chicago, Main Street Car Wash employees in New York City, Airgas and XPO Logistics workers in Southern California, and others in obtaining votes to nix unpopular unions.

Most recently, Foundation staff attorneys are also assisting St. Vincent Hospital nurses in Worcester, MA, with their effort to vote out Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA) officials. MNA bosses ordered a more than 300-day strike against the hospital – the longest in Massachusetts history – during which hundreds of nurses signed a decertification petition demanding a vote to oust MNA.

Thanks to Foundation-advocated reforms the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) adopted in 2020, what used to be “blocking charges” now rarely stifle employee requests for decertification votes in private sector workplaces covered by the National Labor Relations Act, and are generally dealt with after votes have been tallied. However, Illinois public sector employees are instead under the jurisdiction of the ILRB.

“Mr. Salzmann and his coworkers, who put themselves in harm’s way to protect the citizens of Carpentersville, certainly don’t deserve to have their right to dispense with unwanted union ‘representation’ vitiated by the very union bosses who claim to serve them,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “It’s also ridiculous that Illinois law permits union bosses to delay employee votes simply by accusing the employer of often-unrelated alleged wrongdoing, making employees’ free choice subordinate to union bosses’ thirst to remain in power.”

“Foundation attorneys will fight for Mr. Salzmann and his colleagues until they are able to make their voices heard,” Mix added.

Many nurses reported union harassment and bullying during 300+ day union boss ordered strike, now they seek vote to remove union

Worcester, MA (January 4, 2022) – Staff attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation are now representing Richard Avola, a nurse at St. Vincent Hospital in Worcester, MA, in his and his colleagues’ push to eject unpopular Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA) union bosses from the hospital. Avola filed a “decertification petition” in late December with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), accompanied by hundreds of his coworkers’ signatures seeking an NLRB vote whether to remove the union.

Avola and his coworkers’ petition comes as a protracted strike MNA bosses ordered against St. Vincent Hospital has drawn to a close. Media reports indicate that union militants harassed and bullied nurses who returned to the hospital to care for patients during the over 300-day strike. Union partisans reportedly put photographs of working nurses on strike paraphernalia and took illicit pictures of nurses’ license plates. Despite credible reports of union harassment of nurses who exercised their right to work, high-profile elected officials including U.S. Senators Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren expressed support for the union boss-ordered strike.

In response to inquiries from nurses impacted by the union bosses’ strike order, Foundation staff attorneys in March issued a legal notice informing St. Vincent nurses of their right to work during the strike and to cut off dues payments to the MNA hierarchy. The notice offered free legal aid to St. Vincent nurses who encountered union pushback in the exercise of their individual rights.

Foundation attorneys have helped nurses and hospital employees in several cases in recent years. In October, nurse Jeanette Geary won her decade-long case against United Nurses and Allied Professionals bosses in Rhode Island who ignored her right not to fund union lobbying. Foundation attorneys have also represented Swedish Medical Center employees in Seattle, a therapist who successfully decertified the union at Desert Springs Hospital Medical Center in Las Vegas, Rush University Medical Center workers in Chicago, a nurse at Corpus Christi Medical Center in Texas, and others.

“It’s easy to see why Mr. Avola and his coworkers want to oust MNA operatives from St. Vincent Hospital: Union bosses forced nurses to endure a gruelingly long strike, while those who went back to work and refused to abandon their patients faced harassment and intimidation tactics,” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation staff attorneys will fight to ensure that St. Vincent hospital nurses can freely exercise their right to dispense with unwanted union ‘representation,’ and will battle any union boss attempts to hamper that right.”

After NLRB refused to tally 2020 election results to enforce ‘contract bar,’ subsequent vote reveals widespread opposition to union bosses

Selbyville, DE (December 20, 2021) – In June and July of 2020, employees at the Mountaire Farms poultry plant in Selbyville, Delaware held a union decertification election on whether to remove officials of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union from their workplace. In April of 2021, union lawyers convinced the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to destroy the hundreds of ballots employees had cast before they were ever counted. Last week, a second vote conducted by the NLRB confirmed that nearly a year and a half later, Mountaire Farms employees decisively opposed the UFCW in a 356-80 vote.

The summer 2020 vote was requested by Mountaire employee Oscar Cruz Sosa, who received free legal representation from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. Cruz Sosa sent a petition signed by many of his coworkers to the NLRB requesting a vote. The election was held, but the ballots were impounded while the Board considered whether its non-statutory “contract bar” policy should invalidate the election.

The “contract bar” prevents workers from holding a decertification vote, for up to three years, while a union monopoly bargaining contract with their employer remains in effect. Foundation attorneys urged the Board to reverse the bar because it is not found in the text of the National Labor Relations Act, and serves only to protect unpopular union bosses from worker accountability.

Ultimately, the Board sided with union lawyers, upheld the “contract bar,” and threw out the ballots cast by workers at the 800-employee facility. The employees were forced to wait almost a year for the contract UFCW bosses had with their employer to expire before beginning anew the process for another election.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix issued the following statement about the election results:

Despite what we now know to be overwhelming opposition to their presence at Mountaire Farms, UFCW officials took advantage of the NLRB’s rules to block a decertification vote for over a year and a half. The vote tally only emphasizes the injustice of the NLRB’s April decision to apply the “contract bar” policy and destroy  these workers’ ballots, leaving them trapped paying compulsory union dues despite such massive opposition to union officials’ so-called “representation.”

While we’re under no illusions that the Biden NLRB, stacked with former union officials, will end this longstanding impediment to workers’ right to free themselves of an unwanted union, this saga demonstrates why the injustice that is the non-statutory “contract bar” must be ended by a future Board.

2020 Labor Board reforms stopped union boss attempt to block election, resulting in 13-0 vote against union ‘representation’

Houston, TX (December 17, 2021) – Yesterday the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) formally certified the results of a union decertification election in which workers at MDS Boring & Drilling in Houston voted unanimously to remove International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) officials from their workplace. The overwhelming election results were finalized after union officials dropped charges they had filed against the company that could have used by union lawyers to overturn the result.

Ballots were mailed to eligible employees on October 22 after Seth Patrick, an MDS Boring employee, petitioned the NLRB for a vote to remove IUOE officials from his workplace. He filed his petition with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, and collected signatures from enough of his coworkers to trigger an NLRB-conducted decertification election.

On November 19, the NLRB tallied the results and announced that the workers had voted unanimously 13-0 to remove IUOE Local 450 officials. However, the NLRB would not then certify the result because union officials had previously filed unfair labor practice charges against MDS Boring that served to delay certification of the election results.

Under the NLRB’s old rules, such “blocking charge” allegations against an employer would have been grounds for cancelling the vote or delaying it for months or even years until the charges were resolved. Using the “blocking charge” tactic, sometimes repeatedly, union officials often trapped workers into union ranks nearly indefinitely, despite overwhelming worker opposition to union affiliation. In states without Right to Work laws that make financial support of unions voluntary, this incentivized union bosses to drag out the process so they could collect more forced dues from workers.

However, thanks to Foundation-backed “blocking charge” reforms adopted by the NLRB in 2020, elections themselves cannot be delayed by union litigation. Instead, a vote is held, and any extraneous litigation occurs after the election results are announced. In the case of MDS Boring, the vote demonstrated that IUOE officials lacked the support of even a single worker, making it far more difficult for union officials to justify a drawn-out effort to remain in power.

“A unanimous vote proved beyond a doubt that MDS Boring workers didn’t want IUOE officials’ so-called ‘representation,’” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “Under the old system, union officials could have stalled the election for months or years to retain power. Thanks to the new Foundation-backed NLRB reforms, these workers were able to promptly hold the vote, which then demonstrated that each and every worker wanted the union out of their workplace.”