National Worker Advocate Issues Labor Day Statement:

Springfield, VA (August 28, 2008) – Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and National Right to Work Committee, made the following statement regarding this year’s Labor Day holiday. “On Labor Day, many Americans will get a much deserved day off. But as we celebrate the free-enterprise system and the value of hard work, union officials are mounting an unprecedented, billion-dollar campaign effort to grab more forced unionism power. Their goal is to elect a President and a filibuster-proof Senate that will give them even more tools to force workers to join or pay dues to a union.

Happy Labor Day! (But It’s Not So Happy for the Millions of Victims of Compulsory Unionism)

On behalf of the Foundation, I'd like to wish everyone a safe and happy Labor Day weekend. While I hope everyone enjoys their day off, now seems like an appropriate time to flag Foundation President Mark Mix's statement commemorating the occasion. Here's an excerpt: “Meanwhile, many workers feel they have little choice but to pay for organized labor’s billion-dollar 2008 election campaign, and many workers are unaware of their right to object. That’s why the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is providing free legal aid to thousands of employees nationwide seeking to get their money back. In fact, in October Foundation attorneys will argue their fourteenth case accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court – a case which defends the right of workers to refuse to pay for union activism using their mandatory union dues.

Video Spotlight on Locke Supreme Court Case

In the latest update to Right to Work's YouTube channel, Daniel Locke, lead plaintiff in the Foundation's Locke v. Karass Supreme Court case, discusses why he felt the need to file suit against Maine State Employees Association union officials. Also in the video, Foundation president Mark Mix explains what is at stake in the case, and another Maine state employee, Mark Turek, discusses his decision to quit his job rather than be forced to pay union dues to a union he disagreed with.

WSJ: Repeal of Right to Work Laws High on Union Officials’ 2008 Agenda

  Today's Wall Street Journal points out that union officials are pouring upwards of a billion dollars, much of it in compulsory dues, into the 2008 election cycle. The goal? A sea change of American labor law. "This is an all-in bet for them in 2008," says Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee, a group that fights down in the trenches against coercive union power. "As market cycles go, they're in their peak, we're in our trough, and they're looking for a clear two-year run" in an all-Democrat Washington. Then there's the crown jewel: Tucked into the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act is a provision called 14(b), which allows for "right to work" states. Big Labor last took a run at deleting this section, and forcing more unionization, in the Johnson administration. Aside from abolishing employees' free choice of whether or not to join or pay dues to a union, wiping the current 22 state Right to Work laws off the map would deal a crushing blow to the American economy. According to a recent study by the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, forced unionism cost the American economy upwards of $436 billion in GDP between 2000-2006 alone. The yoke of compulsory unionism already takes a severe toll on states without Right to Work laws, the last thing America needs is to expand its reach.

New Video: Right to Work Report Spotlights Hollywood Forced Unionism Abuse

National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix details the Foundation's efforts to help Sai Ly Acosta and other musicians in Hollywood after union officials indicated they would be arrested for showing up for rehearsal.

Information for Media: Photos

Members of the media are welcome to download the following images to accompany op-eds submitted by the National Right to Work Foundation.Mark MixPresidentStefan GleasonVice President

Information for Media: Foundation Spokesmen & Litigators

Members of the media are welcome to download the following images and biographies to accompany op-eds submitted by the National Right to Work Foundation. Mark Mix President Patrick Semmens Vice President for Public Information Raymond J. LaJeunesse, Jr. Vice President and Legal Director Meet the Foundation's Litigators To schedule an interview with a Foundation spokesman or litigator, contact the Legal Information Department at (703) 321-8510

National Right to Work Foundation Launches Online Video Updates

Here's a new video from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix thanking supporters for helping the Foundation fight compulsory unionism online by creating cutting edge video content in its new in-house production studio.

What is Top Down Organizing?

Spotlight on Card Check Deception View the latest developments in the Freightliner/UAW Racketeering Lawsuit Learn about Specific Foundation "Neutrality Agreement" Cases Dana / Metaldyne Heartland / Collins and Aikman Freightliner Cequent Suits Against State & Local Ordinances Other Cases What is Top Down Organizing? Because employees increasingly vote against unionization, Big Labor has developed new techniques to impose forced unionization on employees from the "top down." Key elements of Top Down organizing include "neutrality agreements" and "card check" campaigns. What is a "Neutrality Agreement"? A “neutrality agreement” is a contract between a union and an employer under which the employer agrees to support a union's attempt to organize its workforce. Often employers agree to hand over workers to the union after the Union Bosses initiate a "corporate campaign" that uses publicity stunts, frivolous law suits, boycotts and blackmail to pressure the company to sign the "Neutrality Agreement." Once signed, company management and the Union Bosses use a number of methods to force workers to be represented by the company's chosen union. (Find out more about the methods most often used or see examples of "Neutrality Agreements) What is a "Card Check" Organizing Drive In a "Card Check" organizing drive the employees are not permitted to vote on union representation in a secret ballot election. Instead, the employer pledges to automatically recognize the union without an election if the union presents the company with the requisite number of signed authorization cards. Experience shows that many employees are coerced or misled into signing these authorization cards. Top Down Organizing Resources What are my Rights if there is a "Card Check" campaign at my Workplace? How do I know whether I am subject to a "Neutrality Agreement"? These companies are known to have "neutrality agreements": (Click each one to find out more.) Angelica with the UNITE HERE Union California Nursing Home Operators with the SEIU Union Collins & Aikman with the USWA Dana Corp with the UAW, (View agreement) Freightliner with the UAW, (View agreement, Second agreement) Greater New York Health Care Facilities Association with SEIU Heartland with the USWA Horseshoe Hotel and Casino with LJEBLV Johnson Controls with the UAW League of Voluntary Hospitals and Homes of New York with SEIU Lear with the UAW Mandalay Resort Group/Circus Circus Hotel and Casino with LJEBLV Magna with the UAW Metaldyne with the UAW and USWA National Steel Corporation (Great Lakes Division) with the USWA Quebecor and Teamsters Union Verizon Wireless with IBEW & CWA, (View Verizon Florida agreement with IBEW, Verizon North agreement with IBEW, Verizon Southwest Agreement with CWA) Warnaco with UNITE Zed F with the UAW Read the United Autoworkers Union Model Neutrality Agreement If you know of other companies with "Neutrality Agreements", or think your company might have a "Neutrality Agreement", please contact us. Newspaper Ads about "Neutrality Agreements" Athens, Tennessee - April 2006 Neutrality Ad #1 Neutrality Ad #2 "Home Visits" Ad Articles, Studies and Testimony about "Neutrality Agreements" Foundation Attorney Glenn M. Taubman's Testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions (6/26/13) Wall Street Journal: Why Not Liberate the American Worker - by Mark Mix (12/31/2005) NILRR: Big Labor-Funded Study to Promote Coercive "Top Down" Organizing is Debunked by Research Institute (1/6/2006) (View the report here) Foundation Attorney William Messenger's Testimony before the Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services (9/23/2004) Engage: The Journal of the Federalist Society: "Neutrality Agreements" and the Destruction of Employee's Section 7 Rights - by Glenn Traubman (5/2005) Liberty Magazine: Card Sharks & Marks - Bruce N. Cameron (1/2006) Detroit News: Majority Rules, Big Labor Style - by Stefan Gleason (6/25/2004) National Review: What About the Members' - by Stefan Gleason (8/8/2005) NILRR: What's 'Democratic' about Compulsory Unionism" Inconsistent Reasoning, 'Top Down Organizing Tactics Discredit 'Majority Rule' Excuse For Forced Dues (8/2003) NILRR: Big Labor's Cockamamie Campaign Against Secret Ballot Elections For Workers (10/2003) Employees Speak Out About "Neutrality Agreements" and Union Bullying Marlene Felters's Congressional Testimony (6/26/2013) Washington, DC) Mike Ivey's Congressional Testimony (2/8/2007) Washington, DC) Karen Mayhew's Congressional Testimony (2/8/2007) Washington, DC Statement by Freightliner Employee Katherine Ivey (1/24/2006) Detroit, MI Statement by Freightliner Employee Timothy Cochrane (1/24/2006) Detroit, MI) Declaration by Dana Corp Employee Clarice Atherholt (1/13/2004) Statement by Dana Corp Employee Donna Stinson (5/12/2004) Statement by Freightliner Employee Mike Ivey (5/12/2004) Washington, DC Statement by Thomas Built Bus Employee Jeff Ward (5/12/2004) Washington, DC Statement by Collins & Aikman Employee Edna Dawson (5/12/2004) Washington, DC Declaration by Renaissance Hotel Employee Faith Jetter (11/19/2003) Declaration by Renaissance Hotel Employee David Harlich (11/19/2003) Your Right to Decertify or Deauthorize the Union Decertification Election - Your right to eliminate the union from your workplace Deauthorization Election - Your right to eliminate forced dues from your workplace Litigation and Legal Documents Foundation Assisted Federal Class Action Racketeering (RICO) Lawsuit Against Freightliner and the UAW Union Foundation Assisted Dana/Metaldyne Brief to the NLRB, Reply Brief All Briefs from the Dana/Metaldyne NLRB Case Foundation's "Friend of the Court" Brief in Pataki Foundation's "Friend of the Court" Brief in MMAC View individual case pages for more legal documents National Right to Work Foundation Press Releases about "Neutrality Agreements" and "Card Check" Special Bulletin for Private Sector Workers Subjected to Top Down Organizing National Right to Work To Triple Pro Bono Assistance to Workers Facing Abusive Union Organizing Tactics National Worker Rights Advocacy Group Launches Ad Campaign to Educate Employees Subjected to UAW Union’s Top-Down Organizing Program View the latest News Releases State and Local Laws Imposing Neutrality & Card Check: Similar to neutrality clauses in collective bargaining agreements, another tactic employed by unions to increase union membership without actually soliciting the preferences of workers is to incorporate neutrality agreements in local government wage ordinances. These ordinances often impose so-called "neutrality agreements" on employers who accept service contracts, operating grants, or tax abatements from local governments and bar employers from providing factual information about the possible downsides if unionization, should a union attempt to organize their workers. They also prevent employers from insisting on a secret ballot election to protect their employees' rights and force employers to recognize the union as the monopoly bargaining representative when presented with a majority of signed authorization cards, despite the fact that often employees sign such cards under false pretences. Here are examples of these ordinances, which are likely pre-empted by the NLRA, that include neutrality or card-check provisions: Allegheny County, PA- Sec. 13, Union Neutrality (pg. 25) Fairfax, CA - Sec. 8.50.048, Labor Relation Neutrality (pg. 5), 2002 Marin County, CA - Sec. 2.50.130, Neutrality in Labor Relations (pg. 5), 2002 Watsonville, CA - Sec 2-5.13, Labor Relation Peace and Neutrality (pg. 11), 2002 Santa Cruz County, CA - Sec. 5.10.110, Labor Relation Neutrality (pg. 7, 15), 2001 Pittsburgh, PA - Sec. 12, Union Neutrality (pg. 21), 2001 Los Angeles County, CA - Sec. 2.201.050 B, Neutrality in Labor Relations (pg. 7), 1999 Minneapolis, MN - “Adopting a Living Wage Policy,” #7 (pg. 5), 1997 St. Paul, MN - Preamble, #7 (pg. 5), 1997 Other Top Down Organizing Methods Project Labor Agreements A “project labor agreement” is when the government awards contracts for public construction projects exclusively to unionized firms. Because the vast majority of contractors and their employees – more than 80 percent – have voluntarily opted against unionization when given the free choice, Big Labor has turned to politicians to remove that choice and impose union representation on employees from the top down. (Learn more about Project Labor Agreements) See what the National Right to Work Foundation is doing to protect workers from the abuses associated with "Project Labor Agreements" National Employee Rights Advocate Calls Upon Ohio Attorney General to Oppose Union Discrimination Supreme Court Upholds Bush Ban on Discriminatory Union-Only Contracting (Click here to read Bush's Executive Order) Bush Ban on Discriminatory Union-Only Contracting Upheld by Appellate Court National Right to Work Joins Appeal to Ban Discriminatory Union-Only Contracting Unprecedented Union-Only Project Labor Agreement Hit With Lawsuit National Employee Rights Group Announces Legal Action Against Costly Project Labor Agreement

Michiganders Are Leaving for Right to Work States

The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Michigan’s auto-manufacturing jobs are on the decline, and young workers are quickly moving out of the state. As one Michigan resident put it: "Every week at my church I hear about two or three more young people moving South or Southwest," Mr. Warren says. "Too bad, because Michigan needs to keep its young people." Mr. Warren echoes Mark Mix’s call in the Detroit Free Press on Labor Day, stating: Michigan simply isn't creating enough good jobs to keep its young employees from leaving for more prosperous states. Michigan, one of 28 forced-unionism states, is home of the auto-industry’s “Big Three” where United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials have a stranglehold over employee free choice. The state has seen its fair share of economic decline and is facing troubles both now and in the long-term.According to data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, between 1994 and 2004, the number of 25 to 34 year-olds in Michigan fell from 1.46 million to 1.29 million, a stinging decline of 10.6 percent. The data also indicate this decline is largely attributable to the absence of a Right to Work law in Michigan.To retain its young employees and the energy and creativity they contribute, Michigan needs to create more jobs. And a Right to Work law would guarantee the right of employees to decide for themselves whether or not to join or financially support a union. Angela Davis, a Michigan resident who intends to pursue a nursing career, started taking classes at a local university after being laid off from Chrysler earlier this year. She plans to return to Alabama, where her father lived before moving to Michigan. Mrs. Davis hopes to graduate in 2010 and then retrace her father's journey, relocating her family to the South, where unemployment rates are lower than Michigan's 7.2%, the highest in the U.S. "Every time I visit down there it just feels like home," she says. The whole Southern region of the U.S. is made up entirely of long-time Right to Work states.