Local Confectioner Worker Files Federal Charges Challenging Union Officials’ Forced-Dues Sweetheart Deal with Employer

Candy company worker suspended without pay for trying to exercise rights

Oakdale, CA (November 7, 2014) – A Modesto-area Sconza Candy Company employee has filed federal charges against a local bakers union and her employer for a litany of rights violations.

With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Sconza employee Athena Manning filed the unfair labor practice charges Wednesday with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Manning charges that Sconza management and Bakers Union Local 125 officials failed to notify her of her rights to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership. In May, company and union officials also actively misled her about her obligations to the union, claiming that joining the union and paying full dues were required as a condition of employment.

Click here to read the full release.

Oakdale, CA (November 7, 2014) – A Modesto-area Sconza Candy Company employee has filed federal charges against a local bakers union and her employer for a litany of rights violations.

With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Sconza employee Athena Manning filed the unfair labor practice charges Wednesday with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Manning charges that Sconza management and Bakers Union Local 125 officials failed to notify her of her rights to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership. In May, company and union officials also actively misled her about her obligations to the union, claiming that joining the union and paying full dues were required as a condition of employment.

Because California does not have Right to Work protections for workers, workers can be required to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. However, workers also have the right to refrain from formal union membership and paying for union boss politics and many other activities. Under federal labor case law, union officials must also provide workers with an independently-audited financial breakdown of all forced-dues union expenditures.

Even though union officials never provided Manning with information about her rights, she was nonetheless suspended without pay from her job in June for failing to join and pay dues to the union.

In September, Local 125 union officials gave Manning a breakdown of union expenditures that failed to comply with federal disclosure requirements.

“Union and company officials actively misled and then punished this worker for exercising her rights, all in order to collect more forced dues cash for the union bosses’ coffers,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Independent-minded workers will continue to face similar schemes until California passes a Right to Work law, which would ensure that union membership and dues payment are completely voluntary.”

Minnesota Homecare Providers Appeal Federal Challenge to SEIU Forced Unionization Scheme

SEIU seeks to push home-based personal care providers into forced-dues ranks against their will

Minneapolis, MN (October 30, 2014) – Today, a group of home-based personal care providers challenging a state law that authorizes the forcible unionization of Minnesota’s 27,000 care providers have asked a federal appeals court to overrule a lower court’s ruling issued last week in their case.

With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Teri Bierman and eight other providers from around the state appealed the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota judge’s ruling denying the providers’ request for a court injunction that would immediately halt implementation of the law.

Click here to read the full release.

Minneapolis, MN (October 30, 2014) – Today, a group of home-based personal care providers challenging a state law that authorizes the forcible unionization of Minnesota’s 27,000 care providers have asked a federal appeals court to overrule a lower court’s ruling issued last week in their case.

With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Teri Bierman and eight other providers from around the state appealed the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota judge’s ruling denying the providers’ request for a court injunction that would immediately halt implementation of the law.

The appeal is the latest development in a federal lawsuit filed by the nine providers challenging a state law intended to designate the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) as the monopoly political representative of thousands of providers in the state.

The homecare providers provide homecare services to their sons and daughters who receive state assistance to help pay for their care. For example, two of the homecare providers, Teri Bierman and Scott Price, both provide care to their daughters with cerebral palsy. The suit challenges the forced-unionism scheme on the grounds that it violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of free political expression and association.

On August 27, the SEIU won a majority of votes in a controversial write-in unionization election for Minnesota caregivers. Although nearly 27,000 care providers were eligible to vote under the new law, only 13 percent of the total number of eligible voters approved SEIU affiliation. Consequently, SEIU officials are now empowered to deal with the State for all 27,000 Minnesota homecare providers. Caregivers who didn’t vote or voted against the union are forced to accept the SEIU’s “representation.”

“Forcing folks who care for their relatives into forced union representation is a slap in the face of fundamental American principles we hold dear,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “The appeals court should halt implementation of Governor Mark Dayton’s political payback to SEIU bosses and protect providers’ right to remain free from unwanted union affiliation.”

Rogue Obama NLRB Appointee Again Moves to Prevent Workers from Removing Unwanted Union from Workplace

General Counsel seeks to block workers’ majority petition to end employer recognition of an unsupported union

Chicago, IL (October 23, 2014) – An Arlington Metals Corporation steelworker has moved to intervene to stop a federal agency from foisting unwanted union representation back on his workplace after he and his coworkers attempted to remove the union.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Franklin Park-area Arlington Metals employee Brandon De La Cruz filed the motion with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Chicago. Predictably, the NLRB General Counsel filed a brief in opposition to the workers’ motion.

De La Cruz and a majority of his coworkers petitioned their employer to remove the United Steelworkers (USW) union from their workplace. After the workers presented the petition, Arlington Metals management withdrew recognition of the union as the workers’ bargaining representative, as long-standing law permits.

Click here to read the full release.

Chicago, IL (October 23, 2014) – An Arlington Metals Corporation steelworker has moved to intervene to stop a federal agency from foisting unwanted union representation back on his workplace after he and his coworkers attempted to remove the union.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Franklin Park-area Arlington Metals employee Brandon De La Cruz filed the motion with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Chicago. Predictably, the NLRB General Counsel filed a brief in opposition to the workers’ motion.

De La Cruz and a majority of his coworkers petitioned their employer to remove the United Steelworkers (USW) union from their workplace. After the workers presented the petition, Arlington Metals management withdrew recognition of the union as the workers’ bargaining representative, as long-standing law permits.

USW union officials filed federal charges with the NLRB in an attempt to nullify the workers’ petition and force the union hierarchy back into the workplace. The NLRB’s General Counsel then issued a complaint to force the company to once again recognize the union as the workers’ monopoly bargaining representative.

This new policy, in direct violation of U.S. Supreme Court precedent, is being pushed by union lawyer Richard Griffin, who was installed as NLRB General Counsel in October 2013. Prior to being the Board’s top lawyer in charge of enforcing federal labor laws, Griffin’s “recess” appointment to the NLRB was deemed illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court in late June.

“The NLRB General Counsel’s rogue complaint and his opposition to employees’ right to intervene to protect their decertification efforts flies in the face of long-standing precedent allowing workers to remove a union from their workplace with a showing of majority support,” explained Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “And the very workers who have a direct interest in the result of these proceedings have been thus far shut out.”

“Highlighting the Obama Board’s pro-forced unionism bias, the NLRB still maintains that a company can recognize a union if a majority of workers sign union ‘cards’ through the coercive and unreliable card check method, while its top lawyer works to eliminate workers’ ability to use the same procedure to oust an unwanted union,” added Mix.

L.A. School Employees File Class-Action Lawsuit against Local SEIU for Rights Violations

Union officials stonewall workers’ attempts to refrain from union membership and full dues payments

Los Angeles, CA (October 22, 2014) – A group of Los Angeles Unified School District workers have filed a federal class-action lawsuit against the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 99 for violating their rights.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation-provided staff attorneys, Los Angeles school district building and grounds keeper Douglas Kennedy; bus drivers Eduardo Berumen and Griselda Moran; and cafeteria worker Magi Shanagian filed the lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

In the complaint, the school employees detail how SEIU Local 99 union officials denied their several requests, in one case dating back to October 12, 2012, to refrain from full dues paying union membership.

Click here to read the full release.

Los Angeles, CA (October 22, 2014) – A group of Los Angeles Unified School District workers have filed a federal class-action lawsuit against the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 99 for violating their rights.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation-provided staff attorneys, Los Angeles school district building and grounds keeper Douglas Kennedy; bus drivers Eduardo Berumen and Griselda Moran; and cafeteria worker Magi Shanagian filed the lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

In the complaint, the school employees detail how SEIU Local 99 union officials denied their several requests, in one case dating back to October 12, 2012, to refrain from full dues paying union membership.

Because California does not have Right to Work protections for workers, workers can be forced to pay union dues and fees to an unwanted union as a condition of employment. However, under Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court precedent, workers who refrain from union membership can also refrain from paying for union politics and members-only events.

Despite the workers’ requests to refrain from union membership and full union dues payments, the Los Angeles Unified School District continues to confiscate full union dues from the workers’ paychecks at SEIU Local 99 officials’ behest. The workers are also challenging SEIU Local 99’s agreement provision with the school district that illegally restricts workers’ ability to resign union membership and dues payments to a period of 30 days over the life of an agreement, which is often for a period of three years.

“SEIU officials are stonewalling workers’ attempts to refrain from paying for the union bosses’ radical political agenda,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “This case underscores the need for California to pass a Right to Work law making union membership and dues payments strictly voluntary.”

Obama Labor Board Bucks Precedent and Positions Itself to Weaken Worker-Backed Elections to Remove Unwanted Unions

Workers will challenge NLRB attempt to destroy their ballots in vote to oust union

Chehalis, WA (October 20, 2014) – Disregarding its own long-standing precedent, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued an order that continues the impoundment of Bradken, Inc. workers’ ballots cast to determine whether the workers want to remove a local Machinist union from their workplace.

The NLRB’s ruling endangers the results of an election initiated by Jonathan Fuller and his coworkers at the steel manufacturing facility to determine whether to remove the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) District W24 union as their monopoly bargaining representative.

Click here to read the full release.

Chehalis, WA (October 20, 2014) – Disregarding its own long-standing precedent, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued an order that continues the impoundment of Bradken, Inc. workers’ ballots cast to determine whether the workers want to remove a local Machinist union from their workplace.

The NLRB’s ruling endangers the results of an election initiated by Jonathan Fuller and his coworkers at the steel manufacturing facility to determine whether to remove the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) District W24 union as their monopoly bargaining representative. Fuller is receiving free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

On August 16, 2013, IAM union officials filed federal charges against Bradken during a contract dispute. On August 30, 2013, Fuller and his coworkers filed a petition seeking a decertification election to determine their union representation. On April 23, 2014, an NLRB Regional Director approved an agreement between IAM and Bradken officials that settled the union’s charges with no admission of liability by Bradken. On June 5, the Regional Director ruled based on long-standing NLRB precedent that the facility’s approximately ninety-eight workers could vote in a decertification election, which was held on July 1 despite IAM union officials’ objections.

However, IAM union officials asked the NLRB in Washington, DC to review the Regional Director’s decision allowing the election, causing the NLRB to impound the workers’ ballots. IAM union lawyers argue that the Board should overturn the precedent that permits workers’ decertification elections when union unfair labor practice charges are settled without an employer admission of wrongdoing.

On October 10, a three-member panel of the Board issued a 2-1 order granting the IAM’s request for review, thereby leaving impounded the workers’ ballots. By not counting the ballots the NLRB leaves the union in place even though a majority of workers may have voted it out over a year ago. The grant of review signals the NLRB majority’s embrace of the union officials’ position that the ballots should be destroyed and the vote ruled invalid even though there is no current Board precedent for doing so under these circumstances.

“Taking its cue from Machinist union bosses, the Obama NLRB is positioning itself to eliminate a longstanding worker right to remove an unwanted union from their workplace during a dispute between the union and their employer,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “If the Board does so, it would not be the first time the Obama NLRB destroyed workers’ ballots when they sought to determine their own union representation.”

In 2011, the NLRB overturned earlier Foundation-won protections for workers challenging union recognition via card check unionization. As a result, workers must now wait up to three years after the date of the first bargaining agreement between their employer and union officials before they can petition for a secret ballot vote. In the wake of that ruling, hundreds of worker ballots were destroyed.