After the Senate rejected an attempt to confirm President Barack Obama’s nomination of pro-compulsory unionism radical Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Obama appointed Becker via a recess appointment.

On the heals of the appointment, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys sprang into action and filed 12 recusal motions asking Becker to step aside in any pending case involving the Foundation, citing Becker’s bias against independent-minded workers and the Foundation (download two of the motions in .pdf format here and here). The Wall Street Journal reports:

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation said Becker, who has served as counsel for the Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO, should not hear cases in which the foundation is providing legal aid to workers, because Becker directly opposed the group while serving as counsel for the SEIU and because his prior writings demonstrate a bias against the group.

“We just don’t think he’s going to be able to impartially adjudicate cases involving the Foundation’s attorneys,” said Nick Cote, a spokesman for the group. He cited several writings, including a 2005 article that Becker co-wrote in the Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law in which the foundation is referred to as “funded by the most anti-union fringe of the employer community.”

And as Mark Hemmingway from the Washington Examiner observes:

Well, here’s a new wrinkle. One of the biggest interests groups on labor issues in Washington is National Right to Work. Unions try and portray the organization as a shill for big business, but the fact is that National Right to Work is the only organization providing free legal aid to workers with grievances against their union, and is otherwise responsible for doing a lot to keep unions in check.

Not surprisingly, Becker hates National Right to Work and has written several pointed things about the group including that they are “funded by the most anti-union fringe of the employer community” and are “ideologically driven.” Considering that Becker believes “employers should have no right to be heard in either a representation case or an unfair labor practice case,” he’s probably not the best judge of what it means to be “ideologically driven” or part of “the anti-union fringe.”

Becker has also written “at the urging of the [National] Right to Work Committee the Supreme Court has developed a virtual obsession [with cases where workers get legal aid from the National Right to Work].” And there are other examples of National Right to Work antipathy.

Well, the fact is that you can’t swing a dead cat in the labor relations world without hitting something National Right to Work is involved in. It’s hard to imagine that Becker is capable of giving them (or just about anyone who isn’t a union) a fair hearing. National Right to Work has responded by filing… recusal motions against Becker on the National Labor Relations Board. It will be telling to see how this gets handled.

Meanwhile, Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work appeared on the Fox Business Channel regarding the Becker appointment:

Last month, the Senate rejected an attempt to confirm President Barack Obama’s nomination of pro-compulsory unionism radical Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The Wall Street Journal reports that with the Senate now taking it’s Easter recess, Becker could be appointed via a recess appointment "as early as today."

As the Journal notes, a Craig Becker NLRB appointment resurrection would be disastrous to employee rights:

Mr. Becker has written extensively about the National Labor Relations Act, the law that the NLRB interprets and enforces. In a 1993 Minnesota Law Review article, he said that the "core defect in union election law . . . is the employer’s status as a party to labor representation proceedings" and that "employers should be stripped of any legally cognizable interest in their employees’ election of representatives."

In other words, you can forget about employees getting truthful and non-coercive information about the downsides of unionization.

But there’s more.  Becker has publicly argued union goons should have the privilege to repeatedly harass workers at home until the workers sign "card check" union authorization cards; advocated allowing government arbiters impose contracts on workers without even allowing the workers to vote on the contract; and has even compared union organizing elections to US Congressional elections, stating that the only question decided in such elections should be which union gets monopoly control over workers, not whether they wish to remain independent and union free.

Or as the Journal puts it, "the modern union movement is bloody-minded about the will to power and Mr. Becker is one of its fiercest partisans."

Meanwhile, Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, expressed some additional concerns regarding Becker’s extreme forced unionism record in this morning’s Washington Times:

Mark Mix of the National Right to Work organization reports that in 2007 alone, Mr. Becker’s lawyering forced 63,000 California workers to pay union dues even after rejecting union membership. He [encouraged] repeated "home visits" for union backers, designed to pressure workers to sign public union-organizing petitions. Unions were "formed to escape the evils of individualism and individual competition. … Their actions necessarily involve coercion," Mr. Becker once explained.

To view more information on Big Labor sycophant Craig Becker’s radical views, check out this National Right to Work Committee special video report:

The March/April 2010 issue of Foundation Action is now available for download as a PDF. This is the Foundation’s official bimonthly publication that provides an excellent overview of hard-hitting legal actions being taken by Foundation attorneys every day to combat forced unionism. This issue’s top story chronicles the Foundation’s efforts to help Michigan’s home-based child-care providers fight back against Governor Jennifer Granholm’s corrupt government union political payback scheme.

Also in this issue: 

• Federal Lawsuit Challenges Michigan Scheme to Impose Union on Child-Care Providers
• Union Boss Privacy Victims Case Taken to Supreme Court
• Make a Difference in the Fight Against Compulsory Unionism
• Foundation Unearths Ethical Lapses in Obama Administration
• CWA Bosses Attempt to Rig Employee Vote to Throw Union Out

In addition to to reading Foundation Action online, you can sign up to receive a free subscription by mail here.

UFCW Operatives Misled Worker into
Signing Union Card, Ordered Him Fired for Exercising Rights

Vons grocer repeatedly told UFCW union officials he objected to formal union membership

Escondido, CA (March 22, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a former Vons Grocery employee has filed unfair labor practice charges against United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 135 union officials for misleading him into signing a union card, illegally seizing full union dues from his paycheck, and eventually ordering him fired for attempting to exercise his rights.

In September 2007, Nestor Mendez was told by union officials that he could opt out of union membership and full dues payments by filling out a union membership card and writing “Beck Decision” on top of it. Mendez followed these instructions and wrote a letter in January 2008 informing UFCW officials of his decision not to become a union member.

Under the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck, employees can only be forced to pay union dues related to workplace bargaining as a condition of employment. Moreover, union officials are obligated to provide employees with a breakdown of union expenditures to determine how much objecting employees must pay.

Read the full press release for more information.

Regular Freedom@Work readers may remember the case of Jeffrey Reed, a Michigan employee fighting to end religious discrimination in his workplace. With free legal assistance from Right to Work attorneys, Reed is asking the United States Supreme Court to review a United Auto Workers (UAW) union policy that forces religious objectors to pay more union dues than workers who object to union activities on secular grounds.

Foundation litigators recently responded to the UAW’s final arguments opposing the Supreme Court granting certiorari and hearing Reed’s case. The Foundation’s brief notes that UAW officials forced Reed to pay an additional $100 premium and 22 percent more dues than workers who object to union activities on secular grounds. UAW members and secular objectors are allowed to pay an amount less than full dues if they wish to withdraw their financial support from the UAW’s political activities. As a religious objector, however, Reed is forced to redirect the dollar equivalent of full union membership dues to a third party charity as a condition of his continued employment.

Foundation attorneys also argue that Reed should not have to be disciplined or fired for failing to pay additional dues for the UAW’s policy to constitute religious discrimination. Because this has serious implications for religious objectors in workplaces across America, several organizations have filed amicus curiae briefs in support of the Foundation’s petition, including a joint brief from the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention and the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists and the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence. The Foundation’s original petition for a writ of certiorari can be found here, the UAW’s response here, and the Foundation’s final reply brief here. 

Although the Supreme Court grants cert to only a few cases each year, Right to Work attorneys are hopeful that the Justices will take up this case to clarify a previously muddled body of law. We anticipate receiving final word on the Court’s decision as soon as early April.

Right to Work President Mark Mix sat down with American Family Radio to discuss the Obama Administration’s attempt to blacklist nonunion contractors and employees. Click here to listen or use the embedded player below:

You can also listen to the Foundation’s podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.

Despite union lawyers’ obstruction, workers vote to “decertify” United Electrical union bosses

Pittsburgh, PA (March 12, 2009) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, Pittsburgh Precision Turned Products employees recently overcame frivolous union boss blocking charges to eject the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE) Local 623 union.

In November 2009, Kathleen Lobodinsky, an employee at Precision Turned Products, solicited signatures from coworkers to hold an election to eject Local 623 from their workplace. Instead of defending their presence to employees, union officials responded by filing spurious blocking charges with the National Labor Relations Board(NLRB), alleging that company officials unlawfully assisted Lobodinsky’s efforts to collect employee signatures.

Click here to read the rest . . .

Right to Work Vice President Doug Stafford sat down with nationally-syndicated radio host Lars Larson to discuss Big Labor’s Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill. Click here to listen or use the embedded player below:

You can also listen to the Foundation’s podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.

The pro-worker freedom think tank National Institute for Labor Relations Research (NILRR) just published a study noting that forced unionism hurts young workers the most and because of that, they are leaving forced unionism states for Right to Work states in droves:

Though they are located variously in the New England, Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, and East North Central regions of the U.S., all 13 states enduring the worst losses [of young workers] all have one important public policy in common: Not one has a Right to Work law that prohibits making forced union dues or fees a condition of employment. In contrast, all six of the states outside the West with young-adult population gains of more than 10.0% are Right to Work states.

The study also notes that states with Right to Work protections for its workers are weathering these tough economic conditions significantly better than their forced unionism counterparts and previous studies have shown that workers who flee forced unionism benefit financially more than their counterparts who moved from a pro-worker freedom state into a forced unionism state.  NILRR’s most recent study suggests that the further expansion of Big Labor’s government-granted forced dues privileges such as those in the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill would not only hurt all of America’s workers but also hit young workers the hardest.

Of course, economic benefits alone do not account for the trend of young workers’ moving patterns. It is easy to surmise that young folks — a notoriously independently-minded group — are seeking to pursue their version of the American Dream without being dictated by power hungry union bosses’ demands and allow them to keep their own hard-earned money if they find union dues payment to be objectionable or even just undesirable.

If the goal of Obama’s Deficit Panel is to increase government budget deficits then naming SEIU top boss Andy Stern makes perfect sense. But since the supposed goal is to reduce the record budget shortfalls, Stern’s nomination is a real head-scratcher.

As many union members know, the self-interest of union bosses to corral more workers into dues-paying ranks often has severe costs.  And now that more than half of our nation’s government workers are now under union boss monopoly bargaining control, it’s becoming abundantly clear that one of these costs is the growth of government to fiscally unsustainable levels.

It’s no wonder mayors from across the country are standing up to oppose the Police & Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill, currently pending in Congress, which would force first responders into forced-dues-paying ranks by federal fiat.  As Charleston, WV, mayor Danny Jones told the Charleston Daily Mail, 

If you look around the states, the most unionized states are the ones that are the most broke.

So while SEIU boss Andy Stern continues his using his frequent White House visits to push for a new federal policy that could add $100 billion a year to the federal budget (while forcing employees of federal contractors into union coffers) and the costs of Big Labor’s public sector growth become more clear, concerned citizens can only wonder what kind of recommendations Andy Stern will make on President Obama’s deficit panel.