National Right to Work Foundation Issues Special Legal Notice to Boeing Employees Impacted by IAM Union Boss Strike Order
Foundation notifies employees that those wishing to continue working during a strike should resign their memberships before returning to work
Seattle, WA (September 16, 2023) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has released a special legal notice to the roughly 30,000 Boeing employees reportedly affected by the strike order issued by International Association of Machinists (IAM) union officials last week.
The Foundation’s legal notice informs Boeing employees of their rights, including their right to rebuff the strike order and to keep working to support their families as the strike is ongoing. The notice discusses why workers across the country frequently turn to the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid in such situations.
“The situation presents serious concerns for employees who believe there is much to lose from a union-ordered strike,” the notice reads. “That is why workers confronted with strike demands frequently contact the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation to learn how they can avoid fines and other harsh union discipline for continuing to report to work to support themselves and their families.”
The full notice is available at https://www.nrtw.org/BoeingStrike/.
The notice outlines the process that Boeing employees should follow if they want to exercise their right to return to work during the strike and avoid punishment by union bosses, complete with sample union membership resignation letters. The notice reminds workers that IAM union officials have no disciplinary power over workers who are not union members, and advises employees who wish to work during a strike to resign their memberships before returning to work.
“Union officials can (and often do) fine actual union members who work during a strike,” the notice says. “So, you should seriously consider resigning at least one day BEFORE you return to work during a strike, which is the best way to avoid these union fines and discipline.
“If possible, use certified mail, return receipt requested, and save copies of your letters and the return receipt to prove delivery,” the notice continues, adding that workers who choose to submit their union resignations to union officials in person should have a reliable witness present to combat potential false claims from union officials that they did not actually receive a worker’s resignation.
Further, the notice reminds employees of their rights to cut off all union dues payments in the absence of a monopoly bargaining contract between IAM union officials and Boeing management. The notice encourages employees to seek free legal aid from the Foundation if they experience union resistance as they attempt to exercise any of these rights.
“IAM union officials have a history of seeking to increase their own power instead of doing what’s right for rank-and-file workers,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Foundation attorneys recently helped a Seattle Boeing worker take legal action against IAM officials for seizing his money illegally.
“On the eve of a strike order that may last months, many Boeing workers may decide that going on strike is not the best course of action for them, and Foundation attorneys stand ready to aid these workers in defending their right to continue working and providing for their families,” added Mix.
Majority of Workers at Detroit-Area Hydraulic Tooling Firm Seek Vote to Oust UAW Union Bosses
Michigan workers continue to seek freedom from union bosses, fight back against union boss malfeasance in wake of Right to Work repeal
Detroit, MI (September 12, 2024) – Production and maintenance employees at Hydra-Lock Corp. a hydraulic tooling company based in Mt. Clemens, Michigan, have just submitted a petition seeking a vote to remove United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 155 union officials from power at their workplace. Hydra-Lock employee Keith Woody submitted the petition to National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 7 in Detroit with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, which includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Woody’s petition contains signatures from the majority of his colleagues in support of having a decertification election, well over the 30% threshold of employee signatures needed to trigger such a vote under NLRB rules.
Michigan legislators’ 2023 repeal of the state’s Right to Work protections went into effect this February, meaning UAW union officials have the legal power to enforce contracts that require Woody and his coworkers to pay dues or fees as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In Right to Work states, in contrast, union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary.
If Woody and his coworkers’ decertification effort succeeds, they will be free from both the UAW’s power to speak and contract for all workers in the facility (including the majority that oppose the union), and the obligation to pay dues as a condition of employment.
Michigan Legislators Repealed Right to Work Despite Massive UAW Scandal
In March 2023, a bare majority of Michigan legislators voted along partisan lines to repeal Right to Work at the behest of union special interests, ending workers’ ability to decide for themselves whether or not union officials deserve their dues money. The imposition of union bosses’ power to force employees to “pay up or be fired” came despite polling showing Michiganders, including those in union households, overwhelmingly opposed the elimination of workers’ Right to Work protections.
After the repeal became effective this February, workers from across the Great Lakes State sought help from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in escaping union bosses’ forced-dues demands. The total cases that Foundation attorneys have filed for Michigan workers in 2024 is already well more than double the number for all of 2023. Foundation-backed workers from across the state have recounted a wide variety of union boss misdeeds since the repeal, including forcing workers with religious objections to join and pay dues, taking dues money directly from workers’ paychecks without their permission, coercing workers into contributing to union Political Action Committees (PACs), and more.
The Michigan Right to Work repeal also came after a years-long federal probe revealed massive corruption within the UAW hierarchy. At least 13 UAW officials received jail sentences for embezzling and spending millions in workers’ dues money on luxury goods, vacations, and other personal items. Federal agents are still monitoring the Detroit-based union, and have recently investigated reports that current UAW President Shawn Fain is misappropriating union property.
“The UAW’s implosion over the embezzlement scandal should have been more than enough evidence for Michigan legislators that workers deserve the right to withhold their money from union bosses who are corrupt, abrasive, or just flat out ineffective,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Instead, as a purely political favor, Michigan policymakers granted union officials the power to have workers fired for refusing to support union agendas, and we’re now seeing worker backlash throughout the state.
“Michigan workers should not hesitate to contact National Right to Work Foundation attorneys for free assistance in standing up for what rights they still have in this new legal environment,” Mix added.
Medstar EMT Hits United Food & Commercial Workers Union with Federal Charges for Illegal Dues Deductions
Growing list of charges exposes how union bosses are violating workers’ rights following repeal of Michigan Right to Work law
Detroit, MI (September 10, 2024) – Nicholas Lenning, an EMT with Medstar Ambulance in Clinton Township, Michigan, has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Union Local 876 for illegally deducting union dues out of his paycheck in violation of federal law. Lennings filed the new unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
Lenning filed the federal unfair labor practice charges against UFCW Local 876 after union officials deducted dues from his paycheck without having a signed dues authorization card, and without providing him with notice regarding his rights under the Supreme Court’s Communication Workers of America v. Beck precedent, which was argued and won by attorneys for the Right to Work Foundation.
Lenning’s charge notes that in nearly three years as an employee of Medstar Ambulance, Lenning was never a union member, never signed a membership card and never signed a dues authorization card. The charge further details how, despite lacking his consent, UFCW officials began deducting dues in March 2024, at times appearing to seize extra funds for back union dues. The deductions started shortly after Michigan’s Right to Work law was formally repealed in early February. Lenning even emailed union stewards requesting information about his rights under Beck, but never received any response from the union. NLRB agents will now investigate Lenning’s charges against UFCW officials.
The charges from Lenning are the most recent in a flurry of Foundation-backed cases for Michigan workers who are seeking to challenge or escape union bosses’ coercive power in the wake of Michigan’s repeal of its Right to Work law. Since the repeal became effective this February, union bosses have had the legal power to require workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. In states with Right to Work protections, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
However, even in states like Michigan that lack Right to Work protections and allow for forced-fee requirements, longstanding federal law prohibits union bosses from requiring workers to authorize the direct deduction of union dues from their paychecks. The Communications Workers of America v. Beck Supreme Court decision additionally forbids union bosses in non-Right to Work states from forcing workers to pay money for any activities beyond the union’s bargaining functions, such as political lobbying, and organizing.
Without Right to Work, Michigan Workers Increasingly Taking Legal Action Against Union Boss Forced Dues Abuses
In March 2023, a bare majority of Michigan legislators voted along partisan lines to repeal Right to Work at the behest of union special interests, ending workers’ ability to decide for themselves whether or not union officials deserve their dues money. The imposition of union bosses’ power to force employees to “pay up or be fired” came despite polling showing Michiganders, including those in union households, overwhelmingly opposed the elimination of workers’ Right to Work protections.
After the repeal became effective this February, workers from across the Great Lakes State sought help from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in escaping union bosses’ forced-dues demands. The total cases that Foundation attorneys have filed for Michigan workers in 2024 is already well more than double the number for all of 2023.
“As this case and others demonstrate, within days of Michigan workers being stripped of their Right to Work protections, union bosses were attempting to use the repeal as cover to justify forced dues collections, even in violation of longstanding federal law,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The flood of legal aid requests Foundation staff attorneys are fielding from Michigan workers since the repeal of Right to Work shows once again that union bosses’ greed for forced dues will lead them to callously and blatantly violate the rights of the very workers they claim to ‘represent.’”
“Without the clear legal line that Right to Work provides by ensuring that all union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary, there unfortunately is little reason to think these types of abuses of workers’ legal rights will not continue to spread across the Great Lake State,” added Mix.
AT&T Employees Nationwide Continue Winning Efforts to Remove Unwanted CWA Union Bosses Imposed Through ‘Card Check’
Mississippi and Louisiana AT&T Mobility employees seek to join others in California, Tennessee and Texas who have successfully ousted the CWA
Mississippi & Louisiana (September 5, 2024) – In-Home Experts from AT&T Mobility locations across Mississippi and Louisiana have joined together to file petitions seeking elections to remove Communications Workers of America (CWA) union officials from power in their workplaces. The two groups of AT&T employees seek to join with hundreds of other AT&T workers in California, Tennessee and Texas who have already won their efforts to remove the CWA. All five groups of employees received free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Michael Swift, an In-Home Expert for AT&T Mobility, filed the “decertification petition” with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on behalf of his coworkers across four AT&T Mobility locations in Mississippi. Marquita Jones, a Louisiana-based In-Home Expert, did the same for her colleagues across four Louisiana locations.
If the AT&T Mobility In-Home Experts win their decertification efforts, they will join well over 800 AT&T employees from across California, Texas, and Tennessee, who have also successfully challenged CWA card checks. Under card check, union organizers bypass the secret ballot election process and instead collect cards face-to-face from employees that are then counted as “votes” for the union. Without the privacy of a secret ballot vote, many workers report being pressured, bullied or threatened into signing, which is among the reasons why card check has long been recognized as inherently unreliable and abuse-prone.
In Tennessee and elsewhere, CWA union officials argued the units of AT&T In-Home Experts who had been unionized through card check were already “merged” into a larger unit comprised of thousands of employees, which would effectively trap workers in the union in perpetuity because petitioning for a decertification vote in such a large, spread out unit would be virtually impossible.
Fortunately, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys successfully countered CWA lawyers’ “merged unit” gambit, resulting in the votes being scheduled. Faced with an inevitable vote among the workers, in Tennessee, California and Texas, CWA officials conceded defeat instead of facing a decertification vote.
Biden-Harris NLRB Will Soon Block Workers from Challenging Dubious Union “Card Check” Drives
CWA union officials used the card check process to claim monopoly bargaining power over AT&T In-Home Experts in California, Tennessee, and Texas. However, Foundation-backed 2020 reforms to the NLRB’s election rules permitted all three sets of workers to successfully challenge the CWA union’s ascent to power.
Collectively referred to as the “Election Protection Rule,” the reforms permit employees to submit decertification petitions within a 45-day window after the finalization of a card check. The Election Protection Rule also prevents union officials from manipulating charges they file alleging employer misconduct to block workers from casting ballots in a decertification election, among other things.
Unfortunately, the Biden-Harris NLRB in Washington, DC, issued a final rule in late July that will undo the Election Protection Rule and make it much harder for rank-and-file workers to exercise their right to vote out union officials they oppose. While the rule change will not take effect in time to stop the AT&T Mobility employees from having the decertification votes they requested, it will likely quash or substantially delay similar efforts after the repeal takes effect at the end of September.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, which includes administering votes to certify and decertify unions. Both employees filed the decertification petitions in August with signatures from more than the 30% of employees required, and both seek to challenge so-called “card check” unionizations that CWA union bosses foisted on their coworkers.
“If Mrs. Jones and Mr. Swift had filed their decertification petitions just a few months later, they would be trapped in a union they oppose, denied even the chance at decertification vote for years and likely forever,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “This is yet another example of the Biden-Harris NLRB steamrolling the rights of independent-minded employees, so union bosses can expand their forced dues ranks.
“American workers don’t deserve to be stripped of this freedom, and with the changes set to take place in weeks, employees seeking a vote to remove an unwanted union should act quickly,” added Mix. “Those who are inevitably prevented from voting out unwanted union bosses due to this cynical rule change are also encouraged to contact the Foundation to explore their legal options.”
Labor Day 2024: National Right to Work Emphasizes High Stakes for Worker Freedom
Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and the National Right to Work Committee, issued the following statement on the occasion of Labor Day 2024:
On Labor Day, we celebrate the dedication and ingenuity of America’s working people. Their hard work is truly what keeps this nation prosperous and thriving, but union officials invariably attempt to hijack Labor Day to promote an agenda that undermines the rights and freedoms of our nation’s working men and women.
That’s especially true during this election year, when union officials are claiming that America’s workers are headed for disaster unless their handpicked candidates ascend to power and enact their radical policy agenda. But it’s plain to see that union bosses’ agenda prioritizes divisive politics and coercing workers far above what workers actually want – more freedom.
Big Labor is still pushing as its number-one legislative priority the radical “PRO-Act,” which will eliminate all state Right to Work protections and force millions more workers to pay union dues just to keep their jobs. Among the PRO-Act’s backers is Kamala Harris, who wants nationwide forced-dues despite admitting in a brief to the Supreme Court that union bosses use their power to undermine the economic interests of many workers.
This may be a winning strategy for collecting union boss-directed PAC contributions and endorsements, but stripping workers of the right to choose freely whether union membership and financial support is right for them is without a doubt anti-worker. This is especially true considering the vast majority of workers are not unionized and polls show most have “no interest at all” in becoming a union member.
Elected officials of all political stripes are right to want the votes of hardworking Americans, but the way to win those votes is not granting special interest union bosses the legal power to threaten workers to pay up or be fired. The real pro-worker position is Right to Work, which trusts workers with the choice, so each can join and pay dues to a union if they want but none can be required to join or pay against their will.
This Labor Day, let’s celebrate American employees by empowering each and every one with the freedom that Right to Work provides.
Mark’s statement comes as a newly released nationwide poll of registered voters finds overwhelming support for Right to Work (82%), including among voters of all party affiliations. The Rasmussen Media Group poll also found that 79 percent of union members back Right to Work and oppose forced union membership and dues. Click here to see the results.
Long Beach Worker Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Structure of Biden Labor Board as Unconstitutional
New lawsuit challenges that National Labor Relations Board’s structure unconstitutionally shields both board members and judges from accountability
Washington, DC (August 22, 2024) – Nelson Medina, a Long Beach, CA-based employee of transportation company Savage Services, has just filed a federal lawsuit against the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) challenging the Board’s makeup as unconstitutional. Medina, who is represented for free by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, argues that the composition of the NLRB violates separation of powers doctrines enshrined in Article II of the U.S. Constitution because it shields NLRB bureaucrats from being removed by the President.
Medina’s case now joins three other constitutional challenges to the NLRB’s structure from Foundation-backed rank-and-file workers, including the first ever such lawsuit which Foundation attorneys filed on behalf of Buffalo, NY-based Starbucks employees Ariana Cortes and Logan Karam.
Medina’s lawsuit points to recent Supreme Court rulings, including Seila Law LLC v. CFPB and Collins v. Yellen, which emphasized that the President should have direct authority to remove executive officials who exercise significant authority. Medina argues that the NLRB’s structure, as defined by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), places unlawful limitations on the President’s power to oust NLRB officials even though they exercise significant executive authority.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, joins a similar suit at the same court from Medina’s colleague, Victor Avila. Both Avila’s and Medina’s lawsuits stem from unfair labor practice charges they each filed with Foundation aid against Teamsters union officials in their workplace, which dealt with illegal threats of violence against workers for not supporting the union and unlawful demands for dues payment, respectively. Both Avila and Medina argue they are entitled to have their cases heard by Board officials whose appointment complies with the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
Challenge to Constitutionality of Federal Labor Board Targets Board Members and Administrative Law Judges
Medina’s lawsuit is unique in that it contests the NLRB’s removal protections on both Board members and Administrative Law Judges (ALJs). The suit argues that Board members exercise significant executive branch authority, yet are unconstitutionally protected from at-will presidential removal. ALJs, the suit argues, are subject to a removal process controlled by multiple layers of federal bureaucrats whom the President can’t remove at will, a structure prohibited by the Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB Supreme Court decision.
Board members are responsible for both creating NLRB policy and reviewing federal labor cases decided by regional NLRB offices, while ALJs conduct hearings in cases where the NLRB has chosen to prosecute a union or employer for violating the law.
Similar Lawsuits Crop Up Among Workers Nationwide
Beyond Savage Services, Foundation-backed Starbucks employees are also pursuing cases challenging the constitutionality of the structure of the NLRB. These employees have attempted to hold decertification votes to remove unwanted Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) union officials from their workplace, but NLRB officials blocked their cases based on unproven union allegations of employer meddling.
Ariana Cortes and Logan Karam, two Starbucks employees from New York, recently filed an appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in their lawsuit. They are appealing a District Court judge’s ruling that they lacked standing to bring their challenge. The ruling didn’t address the core constitutional arguments their lawsuit raised. Another Starbucks employee, Reed Busler, filed another similar lawsuit that is currently pending in the District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
“For too long, independent-minded employees who challenge union boss coercion that violates federal law have had to pursue their claims with unaccountable NLRB bureaucrats who exercise power in violation of the Constitution,” said National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “The National Labor Relations Board should not be a union boss-friendly kangaroo court run by powerful bureaucrats who exercise unaccountable power in violation of the Constitution, yet for too many workers, including those bringing these legal challenges, that is what the Labor Board has become.”
Jewish MIT Graduate Students Force Anti-Israel Union to Abandon Discriminatory Demands for Dues Payment
Settlement includes requirement that GSU union inform 3,000+ students of their right to refrain from paying for radical union political activities
Boston, MA (August 21, 2024) – Several Jewish graduate students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have prevailed in their legal cases to cut off financial support to the MIT Graduate Student Union (GSU), an affiliate of the United Electrical (UE) union. The students, all of whom received free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, objected to GSU union officials’ anti-Israel activities, particularly their support for the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement.
Because Massachusetts lacks Right to Work protections that make union membership and financial support voluntary, union officials at unionized private colleges like MIT can force graduate students to financially support a union under threat of losing their academic positions and work. However, this power is subject to limitations under federal anti-discrimination law and some Supreme Court decisions.
Foundation staff attorneys litigated federal charges at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in March for William Sussman, Joshua Fried, Akiva Gordon, Adina Bechhofer, and Tamar Kadosh Zhitomirsky, each of which stated that the union had demanded full dues payments even after they had each stated their religious objection to funding the union and asked for an accommodation as per Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Such accommodations vary, but often take the form of letting the objector divert the dues from the offensive union to a 501(c)(3) charity instead.
Shortly after those filings, Foundation staff attorneys also filed federal unfair labor practice charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for Katerina Boukin, who objected on political grounds to the GSU’s ideological activity and sought to exercise her rights under the Foundation-won Communications Workers of America v. Beck Supreme Court decision. In Beck, the Court ruled that union officials cannot force those who opt out of formal union membership (like Boukin) to pay dues or fees for union expenses not directly related to collective bargaining, even in a non-Right to Work state. GSU bosses denied Boukin’s Beck request on the specious grounds that she had missed a short union-concocted “window period” in which such an objection would be accepted.
Settlement Blocks Union Bosses from Using Student Money to Support Extremism
The students have now won a favorable NLRB settlement, and a favorable outcome of the EEOC charges, that fully vindicate their rights. The students who voiced religious objections (Sussman, Fried, Gordon, Bechhofer, and Zhitomirsky) have obtained accommodations under which they will pay no money to the union and will instead pay money to charities of their choice, despite initial pushback from union bosses. The charities include American Friends of Magen David Adom and American Friends of Leket.
Foundation attorneys scored for Katerina Boukin a settlement that will require GSU bosses to inform the entire MIT graduate student body of their rights to invoke the Beck decision. GSU bosses must declare by email that they will not restrict the ability of those who resign their union memberships to cut off dues payments for political expenses and pay a reduced amount to the union. This email notice will go out to approximately 3,000 MIT students.
The Jewish students’ efforts to assert their rights put on display the radicalism of GSU union officials. The students who asserted religious objections to supporting the union initially received form letters as responses to their requests, which callously claimed that “no principles, teachings or tenets of Judaism prohibit membership in or the payment of dues or fees to a labor union” and that no religious conflict existed because the founder of GSU’s parent union was himself Jewish. Through the Foundation-backed litigation, the students’ religious objections to supporting GSU were accommodated.
MIT Students Expose GSU Misdeeds to Congress & Nation
Both Will Sussman and Katerina Boukin publicly commented on how the GSU union’s public image was synonymous with political extremism and had little to do with academics. Boukin stated that she was deeply offended by the union’s “opposition to Israel and promotion of Leninist-Marxist global revolution” and that “[t]he GSU’s political agenda has nothing to do with my research as a graduate student at MIT, or the relationships I have with my professors and the university administration, yet outrageously they demand I fund their radical ideology.”
In July, Will Sussman appeared before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce to reveal even more details about his and his colleagues’ distressing experience with the GSU union. As Sussman testified, after the October 7 attacks on Israel, GSU union representatives voiced support for Hamas’ bloody “rebellion” and the GSU Vice President was even arrested for her behavior at an anti-Israel protest. “She was banned from campus but remains on [dues-funded] paid ‘union leave,’” Sussman stated.
“The Foundation-backed MIT graduate students who fought these legal battles have earned well-deserved victories. But defending basic free association rights shouldn’t require such lengthy litigation, and meaningful reforms are necessary to ensure union support is truly voluntary,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Forcing GSU union officials to abandon their blatantly discriminatory dues practices is only the tip of the iceberg: Because Massachusetts lacks Right to Work protections, GSU still has the power to force the vast majority of MIT graduate students to subsidize some portion of their activities.
“Foundation attorneys are continuing to provide legal aid for all those who challenge the imposition of radical union agendas at places such as the University of Chicago, Dartmouth, and Johns Hopkins, and they are doing so for adherents of both Judaism and Christianity. But this ordeal at MIT should remind lawmakers that all Americans should have a right to protect their money from going to union bosses they don’t support, whether those objections are based on religion, politics, or any other reason,” Mix added.
Employees at Petaluma, CA, and Dover, OH, Ford Dealerships Successfully Force Out Unwanted IAM Union Officials
Efforts in Ohio and California come as Biden-Harris NLRB tightens restrictions on workers voting out unions
Petaluma, CA & Dover, OH (August 20, 2024) – Employees at auto dealership Hansel Ford of Petaluma have successfully forced unwanted International Association of Machinists (IAM) Local Lodge 1596 union officials out of their workplace. The victory comes after about 80% of Hansel Ford workers signed onto a petition seeking a vote to oust the union. Hansel Ford employee Gustavo Pena submitted the petition to National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 20 in San Francisco with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing federal labor law, which includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Pena’s decertification petition contained well over the 30% threshold of employee signatures needed to trigger a decertification vote under NLRB rules. However, before the NLRB could schedule a union decertification vote among Pena and his coworkers, IAM union officials filed paperwork disclaiming interest in continuing their control over the workplace.
Because California lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, IAM union officials had the legal power to enforce contracts that required Pena and his colleagues to pay dues or fees as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In Right to Work states, in contrast, union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary.
Now that Pena and the other Hansel Ford workers have forced the IAM union out, they are free of both union officials’ power to contract and speak for all employees in the work unit (including the majority who opposed the union) and the union’s power to force them to pay dues to support their activities.
Technicians at Ford Dealership in Ohio Also Force Out IAM Union Bosses
Foundation staff attorneys also assisted technicians at Parkway Ford in Dover, OH, in requesting a decertification election to remove IAM Local 1363 union officials from their workplace. The worker who submitted this petition, Ryan Graham, also obtained signatures from a majority of his coworkers, well in excess of the 30% needed to prompt a vote.
Before NLRB Region 8 officials could schedule a vote at Graham’s workplace, however, IAM union bosses filed paperwork disclaiming interest in continuing their monopoly bargaining power over the workplace. This may have been to avoid an embarrassing rejection by employees at the ballot box.
Ohio is also not a Right to Work state, meaning that IAM union officials had the power to compel Graham and his fellow technicians to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs. While Supreme Court precedents like General Motors v. NLRB and the Foundation-won Communications Workers of America v. Beck prohibit union officials from forcing workers to formally join a union or pay for its non-bargaining-related activities (such as politics), many workers may prefer to decertify an unwanted union that does not respect those rights.
In nearby Michigan, Foundation-assisted mechanics from Brown Motors, a Ford dealership in Petoskey, recently voted in a “deauthorization election” to end Teamsters union officials’ forced-dues power over them. A “deauthorization election” is the only way outside of decertifying a union to end forced-dues demands in a non-Right to Work state and is petitioned for in a way similar to a decertification vote.
The new efforts come as decertification petition filings have gone up over 40 percent since 2020 (according to NLRB data) and worker interest in joining a union is at a historic low. Despite workers’ desire to get away from unions that don’t serve their interests, the Biden-Harris NLRB has just issued a final rule which will make it much harder for rank-and-file workers to exercise their right to vote out union officials they oppose. One part of the new rule lets union officials prevent decertification votes from going forward by filing unverified “blocking charges” alleging employer interference.
“The employees from Ford dealerships in California and Ohio are just the latest examples of the many workers across the country who want to exercise their right to dissociate from union officials that they disapprove of,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “That the Biden-Harris NLRB is paring back this right shows that the current administration is interested in giving its union boss political allies more power to siphon money from workers, as opposed to defending those workers’ individual rights.”
Genesys Nurse Hits Hospital, Teamsters Union with Additional Federal Charges for Illegal Dues Deductions
New charges latest example of how union bosses are violating workers’ rights following repeal of Michigan Right to Work law
Flint, MI (August 20, 2024) – Madrina Wells, a nurse at Ascension Genesys Hospital in Grand Blanc Township, MI, has filed additional federal unfair labor practice charges against the Teamsters Local 332 union and her employer for illegally deducting union dues out of her paycheck in violation of federal law. Madrina filed the two new unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
Last month, Wells and her coworker filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the Teamsters Local 332 union, where they maintained that union bosses threatened to fire them and other nurses if they didn’t sign forms authorizing union officials to deduct dues straight out of their paychecks. The charges for Wells and her coworker Lynette Doyle, were also filed at the NLRB with National Right to Work Foundation legal aid. NLRB agents will now investigate Wells’ multiple charges in addition to the charge filed by Doyle.
The new charges from Wells are the most recent in a flurry of Foundation-backed cases for Michigan workers who are seeking to challenge or escape union bosses’ coercive power in the wake of Michigan’s repeal of its Right to Work law. Since the repeal became effective this February, union bosses have had the legal power to require workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. In states with Right to Work protections, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
However, even in states like Michigan that lack Right to Work protections and allow for forced-fee requirements, longstanding federal law prohibits union bosses from requiring workers to authorize the direct deduction of union dues from their paychecks. The Foundation-won Communications Workers of America v. Beck Supreme Court decision additionally forbids union bosses in non-Right to Work states from forcing workers to pay money for any activities beyond the union’s bargaining functions, such as political expenditures.
“I already had issues with Teamsters bosses’ illegally demanding money from me when Right to Work was in force,” commented Madrina Wells. “Back then, I at least knew that I was defending my right to pay nothing at all to Teamsters bosses I disapprove of. It’s ridiculous that rather than comply with my rights, Teamsters Local 332, now with the assistance of my employer, have violated Federal law once again by deducting dues from my paycheck without my consent.”
Without Right to Work, Michigan Workers Increasingly Having to Take Legal Action Against Union Boss Forced Dues Abuses
In a party-line 2023 vote, Michigan legislators repealed Right to Work at the behest of union special interests, ending workers’ ability to decide for themselves whether or not union officials deserve their dues money. The imposition of union bosses’ power to force employees to “pay up or be fired” came despite polling showing Michiganders, including those in union households, overwhelmingly opposed the elimination of workers’ Right to Work protections.
After the repeal became effective this February, workers from across the Great Lakes State sought help from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in escaping union bosses’ forced-dues demands. The total cases that our attorneys have filed for Michigan workers in 2024 is already more than double the 2023 number.
“Emboldened by the partisan repeal of Right to Work, Michigan union bosses are showing once again that their greed for forced dues is more important than the rights of the very workers they claim to ‘represent,’” observed National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Michigan workers are standing up to defend what rights they still have against union coercion, and the Foundation is proud to assist them.”
“Ultimately though, this flood of legal aid requests from Michigan workers challenging forced dues abuses shows why Michigan workers need the protection of Right to Work, so that union financial support is fully voluntary once again,” added Mix.
