San Diego, CA (December 23, 2014) – An employee of a local union has filed a federal charge against another local union for threatening her with job termination after she tried to exercise her right to refrain from union membership and full dues payments.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, Karen Gomez of San Diego filed the unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Gomez, an employee of the UNITE HERE Local 30 union, mailed a letter to the Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) Local 537 notifying the union hierarchy that she was exercising her right to refrain from formal union membership.

Under federal case law, private-sector workers have the unconditional right to refrain from formal union membership. However, because California does not have Right to Work protections for workers, nonmember workers can be forced to pay a part of union dues and fees, but can refrain from paying for politics and many other union activities.

Under federal labor case law, union officials must also notify workers of their right to refrain from union membership and provide workers with an independently-audited financial breakdown of all forced-dues union expenditures. This procedural safeguard helps inform workers of how their forced union dues are being spent and makes it less difficult for workers to hold union officials accountable.

Even though an OPEIU Local 537 official acknowledged receipt of Gomez’s resignation letter, the union hierarchy did not recognize her membership resignation and continues to demand that she pay full union dues from her paychecks. When she sent a letter asking why union officials continued to demand full union dues, the union never responded.

Furthermore, OPEIU Local 537 officials continued to send dues invoices to Gomez, reflecting an arrearage of full union membership dues, and threatening her with job termination if she failed to pay. In response, Gomez sent a check for the full amount of the supposedly owed dues and marked it “paid under protest.” Despite her efforts, OPEIU Local 537 officials have since sought her termination of employment with UNITE HERE Local 30.

“Forced-dues hungry union bosses are so blinded by their forced dues powers, even union employees cannot exercise their statutory rights to refrain from full dues payments,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “This case underscores why California needs to pass a Right to Work law making union affiliation and dues payments completely voluntary.”

Indiana Supreme Court Strikes Down Third Union Boss Challenge to State Right to Work Law

Hoosier workers contested spurious union challenge

Indianapolis, IN (December 17, 2014) – The Indiana Supreme Court today once again rejected a union boss-backed challenge to Indiana’s 2012 Right to Work law. The case is a lawsuit filed by the United Steelworker (USW) union that makes a number of dubious claims in its challenge to the law, including the argument that unions have a right to force workers to pay for their unwanted services.

The Indiana Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s ruling. Early last month, the court also upheld the law as constitutional in a different case involving the same issues. And a broader challenge was rejected in September by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Click here to read the full release.

Indianapolis, IN (December 17, 2014) – The Indiana Supreme Court today once again rejected a union boss-backed challenge to Indiana’s 2012 Right to Work law. The case is a lawsuit filed by the United Steelworker (USW) union that makes a number of dubious claims in its challenge to the law, including the argument that unions have a right to force workers to pay for their unwanted services.

The Indiana Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s ruling. Early last month, the court also upheld the law as constitutional in a different case involving the same issues. And a broader challenge was rejected in September by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Three Indiana workers, Douglas Richards, David Brubaker, and Michael Miller, filed an amicus curiae brief defending the law with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys. The brief was filed together with the National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center.

The three workers who filed the brief are or were employed in workplaces where a forced dues contract was in place between their employers and union hierarchies before the Right to Work law was enacted. Consequently, the workers have been forced to pay union dues just to keep their jobs, despite the fact that they do not belong to the union nor sought the union’s so-called “representation.”

Patrick Semmens, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement in the wake of the court’s ruling:

“Today, the Indiana Supreme Court once again upheld the statutory and civil rights protections enshrined in Indiana’s Right to Work law. We are pleased that the court struck down this blatantly frivolous union legal challenge, as the constitutionality of state Right to Work laws is a long-settled question.

“Union officials have now failed twice before the state supreme court — and in federal court — to overturn the will of the people and protect their government-granted privileges to force workers into paying union tribute as a condition of their employment. We applaud the workers who diligently and courageously stood up to defend their rights under the state’s Right to Work law to refrain from union membership and dues payments.”

Worker Advocate Blasts Obama Labor Board Rule Change

New regulations would allow union bosses to ambush workers into forced-dues-paying union ranks

Washington, DC (December 12, 2014) – Today, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) again issued new regulations that give union organizers the upper hand over independent-minded employees during unionization elections.

The new rules are designed to dramatically shorten the time individual workers have to share information with their coworkers about the effects of unionization. The new regulations also require employers to hand over workers’ private information to union organizers, including their phone numbers and email addresses.

This isn’t the first time the NLRB rushed out the new rules in December before a Member’s term expired, this time as former union lawyer Nancy Schiffer’s term expires on Tuesday, December 16. The NLRB previously rushed the regulations out before former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) lawyer and Obama NLRB recess appointee Craig Becker’s term expired in December 2011. They were later invalidated by a federal district court in 2012 on procedural grounds.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation released the following statement in the wake of the NLRB’s announcement:

“Christmas came early for Big Labor as the Obama Labor Board has once again given union bosses increased power to ambush workers into dues-paying union ranks.”

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (December 12, 2014) – Today, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) again issued new regulations that give union organizers the upper hand over independent-minded employees during unionization elections.

The new rules are designed to dramatically shorten the time individual workers have to share information with their coworkers about the effects of unionization. The new regulations also require employers to hand over workers’ private information to union organizers, including their phone numbers and email addresses.

This isn’t the first time the NLRB rushed out the new rules in December before a Member’s term expired, this time as former union lawyer Nancy Schiffer’s term expires on Tuesday, December 16. The NLRB previously rushed the regulations out before former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) lawyer and Obama NLRB recess appointee Craig Becker’s term expired in December 2011. They were later invalidated by a federal district court in 2012 on procedural grounds.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation released the following statement in the wake of the NLRB’s announcement:

“Christmas came early for Big Labor as the Obama Labor Board has once again given union bosses increased power to ambush workers into dues-paying union ranks.

“The NLRB’s new ambush union organizing election rules make union organizing campaigns even more one-sided and stifle the rights of employees who may oppose unionization in their workplace. The rules also mandate that workers’ personal information be handed over to union officials, and combined with yesterday’s NLRB ruling that employers must allow company-owned email systems be used for union organizing, the new rules open the door for cyber-bullying by union organizers.

“Although a secret ballot election can’t prevent the fundamental violation of individual rights that occurs under union boss monopoly bargaining, at the very least a reasonable election period is needed that gives workers enough time to educate their coworkers about the potential impact of unionization after months or even years of union organizing and propaganda.

“This power grab reminds us once again that the Big Labor-dominated NLRB, and in fact federal labor law, is not written and enforced to help workers, but to empower union officials with unique and damaging privileges designed to bolster their power and revenue.”

Houghton, MI (December 4, 2014) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a local middle school teacher has filed charges with the Michigan Employee Relations Commission (MERC) against the Michigan Education Association (MEA) union for blocking his attempt to resign from the union and demanding he continue to pay full dues.

Jeffery Hauswirth, a veteran Houghton Middle School teacher, sent a letter to the union announcing his resignation on August 30, 2013. According to the MEA’s bylaws, teachers can only leave the the union by sending a resignation letter during the month of August. MEA officials claim that they only received Hauswirth’s resignation letter in September and that the letter was not postmarked in August.

In June 2014, union officials notified Hauswirth that he owed nearly $700 in union dues for the 2013-2014 year despite the fact that he resigned in August.

The United States Supreme Court has long held that workers have a right to resign from a labor union at any time. Moreover, Michigan’s recently-enacted public sector Right to Work law explicitly states that public employees cannot be restrained from voluntarily leaving a union.

Hauswirth’s charges seek to force the MEA to recognize his August 2013 resignation and stop attempting to collect union dues for the 2013-2014 year. The charges also seek to have the union remove any restriction on members resigning from its bylaws and notify its members, via letters and public notices on workplace bulletin boards, that it was guilty of an unfair labor practice.

“Union officials often force workers to jump through bureaucratic hoops to discourage them from exercising their workplace rights,” said Patrick Semmens, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Despite the passage of Michigan’s public sector Right to Work legislation, union bosses will continue to circumvent the law’s protections until MERC stops these illegal attempts to prevent Michigan public employees from exercising their rights.”

SEIU Officials, Santa Clara County Face Class-Action Lawsuit for Violating Employees’ Rights

Relying on landmark Knox Supreme Court decision, county employees seek to end automatic dues deduction for union politics

San Jose, CA (December 3, 2014) – Two Santa Clara Valley Medical Center employees have filed a federal class-action lawsuit against a local union and the county that seeks to expand public employees’ right to refrain from paying union dues used for union politics.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation-provided staff attorneys, San Jose-area county employees Jeffrey Lum and Andrew Li filed the lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s San Jose Division.

Lum and Li are not formal union members in the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 521. Because California does not have a Right to Work law, workers can be required to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. However, nonmember workers have the right to refrain from paying for union boss politics and many other activities not related to bargaining with their employer.

Although Lum and Li are not union members, SEIU and county officials continue to deduct an amount equal to full union dues from their paychecks as if they were.

Click here to read the full release.

San Jose, CA (December 3, 2014) – Two Santa Clara Valley Medical Center employees have filed a federal class-action lawsuit against a local union and the county that seeks to expand public employees’ right to refrain from paying union dues used for union politics.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation-provided staff attorneys, San Jose-area county employees Jeffrey Lum and Andrew Li filed the lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s San Jose Division.

Lum and Li are not formal union members in the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 521. Because California does not have a Right to Work law, workers can be required to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. However, nonmember workers have the right to refrain from paying for union boss politics and many other activities not related to bargaining with their employer.

Although Lum and Li are not union members, SEIU and county officials continue to deduct an amount equal to full union dues from their paychecks as if they were. Up to 14 months after taking full dues and fees from their paychecks, SEIU officials refund the illegally-seized portion of union dues, without interest. In the meantime, SEIU officials can illegally use the money on politics.

For example, SEIU Local 521 officials did not refund to Lum and Li the portion of dues illegally seized from their paychecks during 2013 until March 2014. The workers argue that this amounts to an unconstitutional interest-free loan to bankroll union boss politics.

This lawsuit also challenges existing lower federal court case law that requires nonmember public employees to pay an amount equal to full union dues — including the part used for union politics – unless they affirmatively object. Workers who object also must renew their objections annually.

In its 2012 Foundation-won Knox v. SEIU ruling, in a case that originated in California, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an affirmative objection requirement for special assessments. The Court there indicated that it was ready to reassess whether union bosses’ forced dues powers, which it called “something of an anomaly,” include the power to use in any circumstances “an opt-out system for the collection of fees levied to cover nonchargeable expenses.” Responding to that suggestion, the employees seek to expand Knox to apply to all instances when public employees refrain from union membership.

“Union bosses have government-granted power to compel workers to fund their political activities unless workers object — a power granted to no other private organization in our country,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The First Amendment right for workers who refrain from union membership to automatically not pay union dues for politics is long overdue.”

New York Childcare Providers File Federal Lawsuit Challenging Forced Unionization Scheme

Childcare providers fight dictate to push childcare business owners into forced dues union ranks

Syracuse, NY (December 2, 2014) – A group of New York home-based childcare providers have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a 2007 executive order that greased the skids for the forced unionization of the state’s home-based childcare providers. The providers seek a refund of illegally-seized union dues.

Mary Jarvis and nine other providers filed the suit Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

Jarvis and the other providers challenge AFSCME-affiliated Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) union officials’ monopoly political representation over thousands of providers in the state outside New York City who operate home-based childcare businesses.

Click here to read the full release.

Syracuse, NY (December 2, 2014) – A group of New York home-based childcare providers have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a 2007 executive order that greased the skids for the forced unionization of the state’s home-based childcare providers. The providers seek a refund of illegally-seized union dues.

Mary Jarvis and nine other providers filed the suit Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

Jarvis and the other providers challenge AFSCME-affiliated Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) union officials’ monopoly political representation over thousands of providers in the state outside New York City who operate home-based childcare businesses.

The forced unionization scheme started under a 2007 executive order signed by disgraced former Governor Eliot Spitzer. The scheme was later codified in October 2010.

Home-based childcare and personal care providers, with Foundation attorneys’ assistance, have challenged similar forced-unionization-by-government-fiat schemes in several states across the country, including Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Michigan. On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in Harris v. Quinn striking down the Illinois scheme, ruling that individuals who receive state subsidies based on their clientele cannot be forced to pay compulsory union fees. The next day, the Court cleared the path for 50,000 home childcare providers in Michigan to receive a refund of union dues illegally taken during Michigan’s now-defunct unionization scheme.

Under the New York scheme, CSEA Local 100A union officials are empowered to confiscate forced dues and fees from over 7,200 childcare providers across the state for this forced “exclusive representation.” The providers in this case also seek a refund of dues illegally seized by CSEA union officials over the past two years.

Foundation attorneys argue that such schemes violate the providers’ First Amendment right to choose with whom they associate to petition the government. The government does not have the constitutional authority to force citizens to accept government’s handpicked political representative to lobby itself.

“Citizens have the power to select their political representation in government, not the other way around,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “This scheme, which forces small business owners, and even grandma taking care of her grandchildren, into union political association is a slap in the face of fundamental American principles we hold dear.”