Indianapolis, IN (February 12, 2013) – A local AT&T worker has filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against a local union for discriminating against him for exercising his rights under Indiana’s new Right to Work law.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Indianapolis AT&T worker James Dawson filed the charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Indianapolis.

In August 2012, Dawson resigned from membership in and exercised his right to refrain from paying dues to the Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 4900 union. Under Indiana’s Right to Work law, which was enacted in early 2012, Dawson and other private sector workers have the right to refrain from union membership and dues payments. However, a worker who exercises their rights under the state’s Right to Work law may still be forced to accept an unwanted union’s representation.

CWA Local 4900 union bosses enjoy monopoly bargaining powers over all the workers in Dawson’s workplace, including Dawson. In late January, CWA Local 4900 union officials distributed copies of the union hierarchy’s monopoly bargaining agreement free of charge to union members in Dawson’s workplace. However, as detailed in his charge, when Dawson requested a copy of the monopoly bargaining agreement, union officials denied his request and in front of his coworkers demanded he pay $416 for a copy.

Dawson’s charge alleges that union officials are discriminating against him because he exercised his right to refrain from union membership. Dawson’s charge also alleges that union officials made an example of him to send a message to his coworkers that union members would be given preferred treatment over nonmembers even though nonmembers must accept the union’s “representation.”

“CWA Local 4900 union bosses are illegally discriminating against a worker who had the temerity to exercise his rights under Indiana’s popular Right to Work law,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union officials are making an example of James Dawson to discourage other workers from exercising their Right to Work.”

Nurses Challenge Federal Agency’s Attempt to Install Illegitimate Union

Union organizers’ intimidation sways outcome of unionization election

Massillon, OH (February 12, 2013) – Two local nurses have filed a motion with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking to intervene in a federal case in which the agency is attempting to force a union hierarchy’s “representation” on the nurses in the wake of a tainted organizing election.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Affinity Medical Center nurses Susan Kelley and Cinda Keener filed the motion last week.

National Nurses Organizing Committee (NNOC) union organizers and Affinity management entered into a “neutrality agreement” that gave union organizers preferential access to the facility, helping them to impose monopoly bargaining on the nurses. Company and union officials refused to disclose the terms of the secret agreement despite repeated requests from the nurses.

Additionally, non-employee union organizers stalked, reported on, and attempted to get company management to retaliate against nurses who exercised their rights to oppose the unionization of their workplace. Company officials, at the behest of NNOC union bosses, even made one of the nurses who opposed unionization document the activities of fellow nurses who campaigned against unionization.

Click here to read the full release.

Massillon, OH (February 12, 2013) – Two local nurses have filed a motion with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking to intervene in a federal case in which the agency is attempting to force a union hierarchy’s “representation” on the nurses in the wake of a tainted organizing election.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Affinity Medical Center nurses Susan Kelley and Cinda Keener filed the motion last week.

National Nurses Organizing Committee (NNOC) union organizers and Affinity management entered into a “neutrality agreement” that gave union organizers preferential access to the facility, helping them to impose monopoly bargaining on the nurses. Company and union officials refused to disclose the terms of the secret agreement despite repeated requests from the nurses.

Additionally, non-employee union organizers stalked, reported on, and attempted to get company management to retaliate against nurses who exercised their rights to oppose the unionization of their workplace. Company officials, at the behest of NNOC union bosses, even made one of the nurses who opposed unionization document the activities of fellow nurses who campaigned against unionization.

The two nurses point out that the secret deal between Affinity and NNOC union officials, combined with the intimidation of nurses who spoke out against unionization, likely affected the outcome of the union organizing vote. The election was “officially” decided by 4 votes with an additional 7 votes contested.

After Affinity refused to accept the results of this tainted election, the union filed an unfair labor practice charge against Affinity demanding company management recognize union officials as the nurses’ monopoly bargaining agent. The NLRB’s General Counsel filed a complaint against Affinity seeking to grant NNOC union officials monopoly bargaining privileges over the nurses.

“Caught between union bosses and corporate executives, these nurses have been stripped of their rights to oppose forced unionism in their workplace,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Medical professionals shouldn’t be subjected to backroom deals that give union operatives preferential treatment at the expense of employees’ workplace rights.”

“The NLRB lawyer’s attempts to foist the union on these nurses highlights the sham the Board has made out of federal labor law, which is supposed to protect workers,” added Mix. “If anything, the NLRB should remove the illegitimate union from the nurses’ workplace.”

Worker Advocate Seeks to Halt Obama Labor Board from Acting in Union Lobbying Case

Labor Board moving to negate Supreme Court’s restrictions on union bosses’ power to force workers to pay for union politics

Washington, DC (February 11, 2013) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys filed a petition in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit asking the court to order the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to suspend further action in a case that expanded union bosses’ powers to charge nonmember workers for union political lobbying.

The petition was filed in the wake of the court’s ruling last month invalidating President Barack Obama’s controversial purported “recess appointments” to the Board. The court held President Obama could not constitutionality make those appointments without U.S. Senate confirmation because the Senate was not in recess. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief jointly with the Landmark Legal Foundation in the case.

As a result, since at least January 3, 2012, the Board has lacked a quorum as required by a U.S. Supreme Court precedent established in 2010, thus invalidating the Board’s rulings since that time.

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (February 11, 2013) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys filed a petition in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit asking the court to order the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to suspend further action in a case that expanded union bosses’ powers to charge nonmember workers for union political lobbying.

The petition was filed in the wake of the court’s ruling last month invalidating President Barack Obama’s controversial purported “recess appointments” to the Board. The court held President Obama could not constitutionality make those appointments without U.S. Senate confirmation because the Senate was not in recess. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief jointly with the Landmark Legal Foundation in the case.

As a result, since at least January 3, 2012, the Board has lacked a quorum as required by a U.S. Supreme Court precedent established in 2010, thus invalidating the Board’s rulings since that time.

Since the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court victory in Communication Workers v. Beck, courts have held that workers who refrain from full-dues-paying union membership cannot be compelled to pay for union political spending, lobbying, member-only events, and similar non-representational activities.

Former Warwick, Rhode Island nurse Jeanette Geary filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against a local nursing union for illegally forcing her and other employees to pay for the union’s lobbying or lose their jobs. In 2012, the Board held that the union hierarchy could force the nurse and her coworkers to pay for the union’s lobbying, including political lobbying in the state of Vermont, but asked for further briefs before it issues an appealable final order.

Today, Foundation attorneys filed the last-resort Petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to bar the NLRB from further action in the case until a valid Board is seated.

“Jeanette Geary’s case is just the latest example of how independent-minded workers have received unjust treatment at the hands of Obama’s illegal, pro-Big Labor NLRB,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The Board must cease its illegal activities expanding union boss powers in the face of long-held Supreme Court precedent and constitutional case law prohibiting union bosses from taking workers’ dues for union politics.”

“The extraordinary circumstances involving Obama’s out-of-control NLRB, which has already proceeded to ignore the appeals court’s ruling, has created the urgency for Foundation staff attorneys to employ an extraordinary legal move to halt the Board’s unconstitutional actions,” added Mix.

Teachers File Brief Defending Gov. Walker’s ‘Act 10’ Reforms in Union’s State Appeals Court Lawsuit

Teachers ask state court to uphold legislation protecting most state employees from forced unionism

Madison, WI (February 6, 2013) – Three Wisconsin public school teachers filed a brief in the Wisconsin Court of Appeals last week supporting Governor Walker’s public sector union reform bill, known as “Act 10.”

Elmbrook School District educator Elijah Grajkowski, Kenosha teacher Kristi Lacroix, and Waukesha high school teacher Nathan Berish filed the amici curiae brief with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation and the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.

The case is a legal challenge brought in Dane County Circuit Court by union officials from Public Employees Local 61 and Madison Teachers, Inc., a local affiliate of the National Education Association (NEA).

Click here to read the full release.

Madison, WI (February 6, 2013) – Three Wisconsin public school teachers filed a brief in the Wisconsin Court of Appeals last week supporting Governor Walker’s public sector union reform bill, known as “Act 10.”

Elmbrook School District educator Elijah Grajkowski, Kenosha teacher Kristi Lacroix, and Waukesha high school teacher Nathan Berish filed the amici curiae brief with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation and the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.

The case is a legal challenge brought in Dane County Circuit Court by union officials from Public Employees Local 61 and Madison Teachers, Inc., a local affiliate of the National Education Association (NEA).

In their brief, the teachers argue that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals should overturn the lower court’s ruling that held that Act 10 is unconstitutional. The teachers’ arguments in the brief rely on precedents long established by National Right to Work Foundation-won cases at the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as recent Foundation-supported victories at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which upheld all of Act 10, and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, which upheld Indiana’s recently-enacted Right to Work law.

Meanwhile, two other Wisconsin public servants – Christopher King and Carie Kendrick – have also filed an amicus brief opposing a union legal challenge to Act 10 in another federal court.

“Once again, courageous Wisconsin public servants who want nothing to do with union bosses’ so-called ‘representation’ have stepped forward to protect these vital reforms,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “No worker should be forced to pay union dues just to get or keep a job, which is why Wisconsin should pass a private-sector Right to Work law, ensuring that all Badger State employees are free of forced unionism.”

Los Angeles, CA (February 5, 2013) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, KTLA-TV sports reporter and weekend anchor Rebecca Hall has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) union for attempting to force her to join the union and pay full dues.

SAG-AFTRA is the monopoly bargaining agent for KTLA-TV, which means employees can be forced to pay union dues to get or keep a job with the station. Under federal law, however, employees cannot be compelled to join the union or pay union dues for things unrelated to workplace bargaining, such as members-only events and political activism.

Despite these prohibitions, SAG officials demanded Hall become a full union member and pay excessive initiation fees and union dues if she wanted to keep working at KTLA-TV. Union officials failed to notify Hall that she could opt out of dues unrelated to workplace bargaining and never provided her with any information about union financial expenditures, information that is required by law to help nonunion workers determine what dues they can be obligated to contribute.

When Hall declined to join or pay up, SAG officials threatened to have her fired for refusing to comply with their outrageous demands.

Hall’s charges are now being investigated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a federal agency charged with administering private sector labor law.

“Instead of informing Ms. Hall of her workplace rights, SAG bosses threatened to have her fired for refusing to join their union and pay full dues,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “That’s unacceptable, which is why we’re helping her fight back against these heavy-handed tactics.”

“Unfortunately, Ms. Hall and others in California will continue to be subjected to similar ‘pay up or be fired’ threats until California employees are protected by a Right to Work law, which would make union membership and the payment of union dues completely voluntary,” added Mix.

Rhode Island School of Design Technician Wins Settlement from Local Teacher Union

Union officials refused to follow Supreme Court precedents

Providence, RI (February 4, 2013) – With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys, a Rhode Island School of Design (RISD) technician has won an informal settlement from a local union for violating his rights.

The settlement stems from a federal unfair labor practice charge Robert Vennerbeck of Providence filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Boston against the RISD Technical Association union – an affiliate of the National Education Association (NEA) union.

Vennerbeck resigned formal union membership and revoked his union dues deduction authorization – a form used to take union dues from workers’ paychecks. The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that workers have the right to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership. Because Rhode Island does not have Right to Work protections making union affiliation completely voluntary, workers who refrain from formal union membership may still be forced to pay part of union dues to keep their jobs. However, nonmember workers cannot be required to pay union dues spent for union political activities and member-only events.

Vennerbeck charged that union officials refused to follow federal disclosure requirements outlined under Supreme Court precedent despite Vennerbeck’s repeated requests.

Click here to read the full release.