Washington, DC (September 23, 2013) – National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys filed a brief at the United States Supreme Court late Friday for a Florida casino worker challenging a much used union organizing scheme. The case, Mulhall v. UNITE HERE, could determine whether union organizers can receive workers’ personal information and other valuable organizing tools in exchange for concessions at employees’ expense.

In 2004, UNITE HERE Local 355 and Mardi Gras Gaming entered into an agreement in which union officials promised to devote over one hundred thousand dollars to help pass a gambling ballot initiative and guaranteed not to picket, boycott, or strike against Mardi Gras facilities.

In return, Mardi Gras agreed to give union operatives workers’ personal contact information (including home addresses), grant them access to company facilities during a coercive ‘card check’ organizing campaign, refrain from informing workers about the impact of unionization, and refrain from requesting a federally-supervised secret ballot election to determine whether employees unionized.

With the help of Foundation staff attorneys, Mardi Gras employee Martin Mulhall filed a lawsuit in 2008 challenging the organizing pact. Under the Labor Management Relations Act, employers are prohibited from handing over «any money or other thing of value» to union organizers, a provision that is supposed to prevent union officials from selling out workers’ rights in exchange for corporate support of unionization. Mulhall argues that the company’s assistance with organizing was of substantial monetary value because it made UNITE HERE’s organizing drive easier and less expensive.

Mulhall won a significant victory in 2012, when the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the company’s organizing assistance could constitute «a thing of value.» UNITE HERE lawyers quickly appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, prompting Foundation attorneys to file a cross-petition asking the Court to review certain aspects of the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling.

Foundation attorneys believe that the Eleventh Circuit’s decision was too narrowly tailored to always prevent companies from aiding union organizers with valuable assistance. The Supreme Court will now revisit whether the company’s organizing assistance constitutes «a thing of value.

«We hope the Supreme Court will expand upon the Eleventh Circuit’s landmark ruling and ensure that union organizers can’t cut backroom deals that harm the very people they claim they want to represent,» said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. «Companies shouldn’t be allowed to turn over employees’ personal information to unscrupulous Big Labor organizers as a negotiating tactic.»

The Court will hear the case on November 13.

Springfield, VA (September 13, 2013) – Recent media reports suggest that United Auto Workers (UAW) union officials are pushing Volkswagen AG (VOW.DE) to eliminate a secret ballot vote on unionization and instead unionize all workers in Chattanooga, Tennessee on the basis of an unreliable and abuse-prone «card check» process.

After UAW union officials claimed to receive a majority of workers signing union «cards,» UAW union president Bob King told Reuters yesterday that the VW employees should be put under union monopoly control through the card check, and that they should not vote in private because, he claimed, such a secret ballot vote would be «divisive.»

However, the National Right to Work Foundation has received a number of calls from workers at the plant who were told by UAW union organizers that a signature on the card was to call for a secret ballot unionization election.

Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement in response to King’s statement to Reuters:

«Despite their promises, UAW union officials are now trying to deny workers a secret ballot election to determine whether to unionize. Instead, they are pressuring Volkswagen to recognize them as the workers’ monopoly bargaining representative.

«Any worker who believes they may have been misled, pressured, or coerced into signing a union ‘card’ should contact the National Right to Work Foundation at 1-800-336-3600 or the Foundation’s website at www.nrtw.org immediately. It is not too late for workers to protect their legal rights.»

Springfield, VA (September 11, 2013) – The National Right to Work Foundation has received numerous inquiries from concerned Indiana workers after a Lake County judge invalidated the state’s recently enacted Right to Work law.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation, released the following statement about the decision and the current status of Indiana’s Right to Work law:

«Despite the Lake County court judge’s ruling, the constitutionality of Right to Work laws has long been a settled question. No worker should ever be forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys plan to file an amicus brief for workers they represent in support of Indiana’s Right to Work law when the case is considered on appeal at the Indiana Supreme Court.

«In the meantime, Indiana’s popular Right to Work law remains in effect while the case is pending on appeal. As such, workers will continue to have the choice to refrain from union membership and dues payments.

«Workers who have questions about their rights or about Indiana’s Right to Work law should contact the National Right to Work Foundation at 1-800-336-3600 or via email to legal@nrtw.org.»

Right to Work Foundation Announces New Addition to Legal Team

Regent-trained attorney dedicated to the cause of individual liberty for America’s workers

Washington, DC (September 20, 2013) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has hired Amanda Freeman of Woodbridge, Virginia as an addition to its cutting-edge legal team.

Freeman is a member of the Virginia State Bar and 2009 graduate of the Regent University School of Law in Virginia Beach, Virginia.

«Amanda brings a real commitment to defending and advancing individual liberty to the Foundation,» said Ray LaJeunesse, vice president and legal director of the National Right to Work Foundation.

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (September 20, 2013) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has hired Amanda Freeman of Woodbridge, Virginia as an addition to its cutting-edge legal team.

Freeman is a member of the Virginia State Bar and 2009 graduate of the Regent University School of Law in Virginia Beach, Virginia.

«Amanda brings a real commitment to defending and advancing individual liberty to the Foundation,» said Ray LaJeunesse, vice president and legal director of the National Right to Work Foundation.

«She will assist the Foundation’s legal staff in helping conscientious workers refrain from paying for Big Labor’s political agenda, enforcing individual employees’ rights against the abuses of compulsory unionism, and establishing new precedents increasing workplace freedom.»

As the newest of the Foundation’s 17 staff attorneys, Freeman will help build on the Foundation’s litigation record for union-abused workers that includes 16 cases at the U.S. Supreme Court, one of which will be argued in November. Currently, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys represent thousands of workers in nearly 200 active cases nationwide.

Before joining the Foundation, Freeman served as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Glen A. Huff of the Virginia Court of Appeals and was previously a judicial clerk for the Honorable Robert J. Humphreys of the Virginia Court of Appeals. She was also an intern for Lentz, Stepanovich & Bergethon, PLC, in Virginia Beach and was a paralegal at Mauck & Baker, LLC, in Chicago, Illinois.

While at Regent, Freeman was managing editor of the school’s Law Review and also studied abroad in Strasbourg, France. She holds a bachelors degree in Administrative Management with a minor in Political Science from Bob Jones University, where she graduated cum laude in 2005.

Federal Appeals Court Rules to Halt Implementation of Minnesota’s Childcare Unionization Scheme

Childcare providers fight dictate to push them into forced union dues ranks

Minneapolis, MN (September 19, 2013) – Today, a federal appeals court ruled to delay implementation of Minnesota’s new law that seeks to forcibly unionize the state’s home-based childcare providers.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Jennifer Parrish from Rochester and 11 other providers from around the state filed an appeal last month after the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota dismissed their lawsuit on the grounds that it was filed too soon.

Parrish and other providers seek to halt implementation of a recently-passed law intended to designate American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) officials as the monopoly political representative of thousands of providers in the state, who are either owners of childcare businesses or family members who take care of related children.

Patrick Semmens, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement on the appeals court ruling:

«Minnesota’s childcare providers are no longer under imminent threat to be forcibly unionized in a union they want nothing to do with.

«The court ruled to delay implementation of the law pending the outcome of a National Right to Work Foundation-led challenge pending at the U.S. Supreme Court of a similar law passed in Illinois.»

Click here to read the full release.

Minneapolis, MN (September 19, 2013) – Today, a federal appeals court ruled to delay implementation of Minnesota’s new law that seeks to forcibly unionize the state’s home-based childcare providers.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Jennifer Parrish from Rochester and 11 other providers from around the state filed an appeal last month after the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota dismissed their lawsuit on the grounds that it was filed too soon.

Parrish and other providers seek to halt implementation of a recently-passed law intended to designate American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) officials as the monopoly political representative of thousands of providers in the state, who are either owners of childcare businesses or family members who take care of related children.

Patrick Semmens, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement on the appeals court ruling:

«Minnesota’s childcare providers are no longer under imminent threat to be forcibly unionized in a union they want nothing to do with.

«The court ruled to delay implementation of the law pending the outcome of a National Right to Work Foundation-led challenge pending at the U.S. Supreme Court of a similar law passed in Illinois.»

Home-based childcare and personal care providers have challenged similar forced-unionization-by-government-fiat schemes in several states across the country. Foundation attorneys argue that such schemes violate the providers’ First Amendment right to choose with whom they associate to petition the government.

Local Cold Storage Warehouse Worker Files Federal Unfair Labor Practice Charge against UFCW Union

Union officials post coercive notices to mislead workers into dues-paying ranks

Rochelle, IL (September 19, 2013) – An Americold Logistics warehouse employee has filed a federal charge against a local union for violating her rights and posting coercive notices in the workplace designed to mislead workers into dues-paying ranks.

Karen Cox of Dixon filed the federal charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

In June 2012, a local affiliate of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) unionized Cox’s workplace. However, union and company officials did not reach a contract until June 2013. During that time, Cox began a campaign to remove the unwanted union from her workplace. In August, the workers voted in a secret-ballot election whether to remove the union from their workplace. At the request of the union hierarchy, the results of the election have been impounded pending review by the NLRB.

In September, union officials posted a notice in the workplace demanding workers become full dues paying union members, or they will be fired.

Click here to read the full release.

Rochelle, IL (September 19, 2013) – An Americold Logistics warehouse employee has filed a federal charge against a local union for violating her rights and posting coercive notices in the workplace designed to mislead workers into dues-paying ranks.

Karen Cox of Dixon filed the federal charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

In June 2012, a local affiliate of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) unionized Cox’s workplace. However, union and company officials did not reach a contract until June 2013. During that time, Cox began a campaign to remove the unwanted union from her workplace. In August, the workers voted in a secret-ballot election whether to remove the union from their workplace. At the request of the union hierarchy, the results of the election have been impounded pending review by the NLRB.

In September, union officials posted a notice in the workplace demanding workers become full dues paying union members, or they will be fired.

The notice did not inform workers of their rights to refrain from union membership and full dues payments — rights long upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Also the union falsely stated that the workers must fill out a union dues deduction authorization form as a condition of their employment, although workers cannot lawfully be required to fill out such a form to pay union dues.

Because Illinois does not have Right to Work protections for its workers, Cox and her coworkers could be forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment if the union is not removed as a result of the workers’ August vote. However, because the results of the election are unknown, Cox asks the Board to allow workers to retroactively refrain from union membership and full dues payments back to the time they were first subject to the union monopoly agreement.

Cox also asks that union officials be required to keep all dues and fees seized from workers in an escrow account pending the results of the August election with the condition that union officials must return the money to the workers if a majority of the workers had voted to remove the union from their workplace.

«Union officials are posting legally-suspect notices to coerce workers into paying full union dues when they may not have to,» said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. «Cases like this underscore the need for Illinois to pass a Right to Work law making union affiliation and dues payments completely voluntary.»

Reading, PA (September 12, 2013) – A FirstEnergy Corp. worker has filed a federal charge against a local union for violating her rights.

With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, Deborah Adie of Orwigsburg filed the charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In the charge, Adie alleges that International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 777 union officials demanded she join the union or she would lose her job.

Under federal law, no worker can be forced to formally join a union. However, because Pennsylvania is not a Right to Work state, workers can be forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. IBEW Local 777 union officials never informed Adie of her right to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership, a right upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Right to Work Foundation-won Communications Workers v. Beck case.

In mid-March, Adie wrote a letter to the union hierarchy resigning her union membership and objecting to paying full union dues. Despite her request, union officials refused to acknowledge her resignation, and they continue to collect full union dues from her paychecks.

In April, Adie was told by a union official that she needed to fill out a union form instead of her March resignation letter in order to resign membership. Because she failed to turn in that form, she was notified that the union would not recognize her resignation and would continue to take full union dues from her paychecks.

Adie’s charge also challenges the provision of the IBEW Local 777’s monopoly bargaining agreement with FirstEnergy that illegally requires workers to remain in the union as a condition of their employment.

«No worker should ever be forced to join or pay dues to an unwanted union just to get or keep a job,» said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. «And no worker should be required to jump through hoops just to exercise their rights.»

«This case underscores why Pennsylvania needs to pass a Right to Work law making union membership and dues payments completely voluntary,» added Mix.

Twenty-four states have Right to Work protections for employees. Public polling shows that nearly 80 percent of Americans and union members support the Right to Work principle of voluntary unionism.