Kissimmee, FL (March 8, 2012) – An Osceola Regional Medical Center housekeeper has filed federal charges against a major healthcare union for repeatedly violating federal law by refusing to allow her to exercise her right to refrain from dues-paying union membership under Florida’s popular Right to Work law.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, Imaculada Camara of St. Cloud filed the charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

On December 8, 2011, Camara sent a letter notifying Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Healthcare Workers East officials that she was exercising her right to resign from union membership. Instead of acknowledging her request, SEIU officials rejected her letter because it was not sent via registered mail. On December 28, Camara sent a second letter, which SEIU officials again rejected, this time for not being timely.

In both instances, the SEIU officials’ refusal to allow Camara to exercise her right to refrain from union membership clearly violates federal law because any worker has the right to resign from full-dues-paying union membership at any time and is not required to notify the union she is resigning via certified mail.

Camara’s federal charge also challenges the legality of the union hierarchy’s dues deduction authorization – a document used by union officials to automatically collect dues from employees’ paychecks – which restrains a worker’s ability to exercise their right to resign from union membership.

Eduardo Lopez, a colleague of Camara, filed a similar charge in January. The charges will be investigated by the NLRB Regional Office 12 in Tampa.

«SEIU officials are just making up excuses to prevent workers from exercising their constitutionally-protect right to refrain from union membership,» said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. «Schemes like this show that the ultimate goal of union officials is to collect more forced dues from workers, even when rank-and-file employees want nothing to do with the union.»

Alaska State Troopers Seek to Handcuff Government Union Forced-Dues Scheme

Right to Work Foundation attorneys challenge union hierarchy for violating employees’ constitutional rights

Anchorage, AK (March 8, 2012) – Two Alaska State Troopers have filed a federal lawsuit against a local union and the Department of Public Safety for violating their rights. Patrick Johnson and Robin Benning filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska in Anchorage with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.

Both Johnson and Benning resigned from formal union membership in the Public Safety Employees Association (PSEA) union, an affiliate of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 803, in August 2011, and invoked their right to refrain from paying full union dues.

Read the entire release here.

Anchorage, AK (March 8, 2012) – Two Alaska State Troopers have filed a federal lawsuit against a local union and the Department of Public Safety for violating their rights. Patrick Johnson and Robin Benning filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska in Anchorage with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.

Both Johnson and Benning resigned from formal union membership in the Public Safety Employees Association (PSEA) union, an affiliate of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 803, in August 2011, and invoked their right to refrain from paying full union dues.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Foundation’s Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986) case that union officials can collect union fees as a condition of employment, but must first provide nonmember public workers with an independently-audited financial breakdown of all forced-dues union expenditures and the opportunity to object and challenge the amount of forced union fees before an impartial decision maker. This minimal safeguard is designed to ensure that workers have an opportunity to refrain from paying for union boss political activities and union member-only events.

PSEA and state officials continue to deduct full union dues from the Troopers’ paychecks as if they were union members. PSEA union officials have refused to provide a breakdown of union expenditures and have not given the Troopers an opportunity to challenge the forced union fees before an independent third party.

The Alaska Department of Public Safety is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit for its complicity in the confiscation of full forced dues from the Troopers’ paychecks.

The Troopers seek refunds of the amount of forced union dues payments illegally taken from their paychecks and to enjoin future collection of any dues until PSEA union officials comply with the requirements laid down by the Supreme Court in Hudson.

«PSEA union bosses are deliberately keeping rank-and-file workers in the dark to keep their forced-dues gravy train going,» said Patrick Semmens, National Right to Work Foundation legal information director. «To prevent these types of forced unionism abuses in the future, Alaska needs a Right to Work law making union affiliation and dues payments completely voluntary.»

Public Employee Union Faces Federal Lawsuit for Illegal Forced Dues Scheme

Right to Work Foundation attorneys challenge union hierarchy for violating employee’s constitutional rights

San Francisco, CA (March 6, 2012) – An Alameda County East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) employee has filed a federal lawsuit against a local union and the public agency for violating his rights.

James C. Hankins filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.

Hankins resigned formal union membership from the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 444 more than ten years ago.

However, in April 2011, AFSCME Local 444 and EBMUD officials began to deduct full union dues from Hawkins’s paycheck as if he was a full union member.

Read the entire press release here.

San Francisco, CA (March 6, 2012) – An Alameda County East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) employee has filed a federal lawsuit against a local union and the public agency for violating his rights.

James C. Hankins filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco with free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation.

Hankins resigned formal union membership from the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 444 more than ten years ago.

However, in April 2011, AFSCME Local 444 and EBMUD officials began to deduct full union dues from Hawkins’s paycheck as if he was a full union member.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Foundation’s Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986) case that union officials can collect some union fees as a condition of employment, but they must first provide public workers with an independently-audited financial breakdown of all forced-dues union expenditures and the opportunity to object to and challenge the amount of forced union dues or fees before an impartial decision maker. This minimal safeguard at least ensures that workers have an opportunity to refrain from paying for union boss political activities and union member-only events.

AFSCME Local 444 union officials have refused to provide such a breakdown and have not given workers an opportunity to opt out of paying full union dues. The EBMUD is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit for its complicity in the confiscation of full forced dues from Hankins’s paycheck.

Hankins seeks refunds of the amount of forced union dues payments illegally taken from his paychecks and to enjoin future collection until AFSCME union officials comply with Hudson.

"AFSCME Local 444 union bosses are deliberately keeping rank-and-file workers in the dark to keep their forced-dues gravy train going," said Patrick Semmens, National Right to Work Foundation legal information director. "To prevent these types of forced unionism abuses, California needs a Right to Work law making union affiliation and dues payments completely voluntary."

Madison, WI (March 6, 2012) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation and the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a Wisconsin public school teacher filed an amicus curiae brief in state court yesterday supporting Governor Walker’s public sector union reform bill. The recently-enacted legislation ensures that most Wisconsin public employees do not have to join or pay dues to a union as a condition of employment and bans automatic union dues deductions from public employees’ paychecks.

Eli Grajkowski, a veteran Wisconsin educator, filed the brief today in Dane County Circuit Court in response to a union legal challenge by the Public Employees Local 61 union and Madison Teachers, Inc., a local affiliate of the National Education Association (NEA) union.

In the brief, Grajkowski asks the judge to uphold the legislation as constitutional and deny the unions’ request to suspend the law. Grajkowski’s arguments rely on the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent Davenport v. WEA, in which the Court unanimously held that union bosses enjoy an «extraordinary power» to force workers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment, but have no constitutional right to use government resources to deduct union dues or fees from workers’ paychecks.

Meanwhile, three additional Wisconsin civil servants –Kristi Lacroix, Nathan Berish, and Ricardo Cruz – continue to defend Walker’s reforms from a federal court challenge to the recently-enacted legislation. Two other public servants – Christopher King and Carie Kendrick – have also filed an amicus brief opposing a third union legal challenge to the legislation in another federal court.

«Once again, courageous Wisconsin public servants who want nothing to do with union bosses’ so-called ‘representation’ have stepped forward to protect these vital reforms,» said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. «No worker should be forced to pay union dues just to get or keep a job, which is why Wisconsin should pass full Right to Work law, ensuring that all Badger State employees are free of forced unionism.»

Workers File Brief Opposing Union Boss Challenge to Indiana Right to Work Law

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys provide free legal aid to workers defending law that ends union boss forced dues powers

Hammond, IN (March 2, 2012) – In response to union bosses’ federal lawsuit against Indiana’s popular Right to Work law, a group of Indiana workers from across the state are filing an amicus brief in support of their newly-enacted Right to Work freedoms.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the four workers – David Bercot, a certified wastewater operator for ITR Concession Company which services Indiana toll road rest stops in the Fort Wayne-area; Joel Tibbetts, a Minteq International assistant manager in Valparaiso; Douglas Richards, an employee with Goshen-based Cequent Towing Products; and Larry Getts, a Dana Holding Corporation tube press technician in Albion – all joined in the brief defending the law.

Union officials publicly floated the idea of challenging Indiana’s Right to Work law before it was enacted. International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 150 headquartered in suburban Chicago, Illinois filed a federal lawsuit late last month challenging the law and requesting an injunction against its implementation.

Both Bercot’s and Tibbetts’s workplaces are unionized by the IUOE Local 150 union hierarchy. Both workers have refrained from union membership but are still forced to accept IUOE Local 150 union officials’ so-called "representation" and were required to pay dues to the union as a condition of employment before Indiana’s Right to Work law was enacted.

Read the entire press release here.

Hammond, IN (March 2, 2012) – In response to union bosses’ federal lawsuit against Indiana’s popular Right to Work law, a group of Indiana workers from across the state are filing an amicus brief in support of their newly-enacted Right to Work freedoms.

With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the four workers – David Bercot, a certified wastewater operator for ITR Concession Company which services Indiana toll road rest stops in the Fort Wayne-area; Joel Tibbetts, a Minteq International assistant manager in Valparaiso; Douglas Richards, an employee with Goshen-based Cequent Towing Products; and Larry Getts, a Dana Holding Corporation tube press technician in Albion – all joined in the brief defending the law.

Union officials publicly floated the idea of challenging Indiana’s Right to Work law before it was enacted. International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 150 headquartered in suburban Chicago, Illinois filed a federal lawsuit late last month challenging the law and requesting an injunction against its implementation.

Both Bercot’s and Tibbetts’s workplaces are unionized by the IUOE Local 150 union hierarchy. Both workers have refrained from union membership but are still forced to accept IUOE Local 150 union officials’ so-called «representation» and were required to pay dues to the union as a condition of employment before Indiana’s Right to Work law was enacted.

Indiana is the nation’s 23rd Right to Work state. Public polling shows that nearly 80 percent of Americans support the Right to Work principle, including 80 percent of union members.

Foundation attorneys have successfully defended state Right to Work laws in the past, including Oklahoma’s. The Foundation’s legal task force dedicated to defending Indiana’s Right to Work law has already examined the union lawyers’ lines of attack against the law and determined that the law is on sound legal ground. A Foundation attorney will attend the injunction hearing on Monday in Hammond.

«Union bosses want to undo what thousands of Hoosier citizens have worked hard to achieve over the past decade,» said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. «Because union partisans cannot win the hearts and minds of Indiana’s workers and voters, they seek to have the courts strike down Indiana’s popular Right to Work law for them.»

In addition to defending the Right to Work law from spurious union legal challenges, Foundation staff attorneys are giving free legal aid to employees seeking to exercise their newfound Right to Work. Information about Indiana’s Right to Work law, including how Indiana employees can exercise their Right to Work can be found on the Foundation’s website: www.nrtw.org.

Federal Court Rubberstamps Obama NLRB Rule to Push More Workers into Union Ranks

National Right to Work Foundation fights Labor Board’s decision to promote monopoly unionism in virtually every workplace in America

Washington, DC (March 2, 2012) – Today, a federal judge upheld the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) power to enforce its controversial new rule requiring virtually every employer in the country to post biased information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they’ve never committed a violation or been accused of unfair labor practices.

The judge ruled that, if an employer fails to post the notice, it can be found to have committed an unfair labor practice and that fact can be used as evidence of "anti-union animus" in other cases in which an employer is accused of violating federal labor law.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation in conjunction with the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) filed the lawsuit challenging the notice posting rules with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director of the National Right to Work Foundation, had the following statement in the wake of the judge’s ruling:

"It is unfortunate that the court rubberstamped the Obama NLRB’s rule, giving union bosses another tool to push workers into forced union dues ranks, and threatening employers if they don’t display biased pro-compulsory unionism propaganda on their property.

Read the entire press release here.

Washington, DC (March 2, 2012) – Today, a federal judge upheld the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) power to enforce its controversial new rule requiring virtually every employer in the country to post biased information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they’ve never committed a violation or been accused of unfair labor practices.

The judge ruled that, if an employer fails to post the notice, it can be found to have committed an unfair labor practice and that fact can be used as evidence of "anti-union animus" in other cases in which an employer is accused of violating federal labor law.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation in conjunction with the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) filed the lawsuit challenging the notice posting rules with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director of the National Right to Work Foundation, had the following statement in the wake of the judge’s ruling:

"It is unfortunate that the court rubberstamped the Obama NLRB’s rule, giving union bosses another tool to push workers into forced union dues ranks, and threatening employers if they don’t display biased pro-compulsory unionism propaganda on their property.

The judge’s ruling effectively requires every job provider in America, from Mom and Pop shops and small businesses to larger companies, even some religiously-affiliated organizations, to post biased notices about workers’ rights, leaving the distorted NLRB requirement in place.

"In the past, employers were required to post notices of workers’ rights only if they violated labor laws. However, the judge’s decision turns that precedent on its head and almost guarantees that any job provider who fails to post a notice will face legal consequences.

"National Right to Work Foundation plans to appeal the court’s decision."

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys argue that the NLRB has exceeded its authority granted by Congress and violated free speech guarantees of the First Amendment.