Bus Drivers Slam the Brakes on Teamster Union Boss Intimidation and Threats
Bus Drivers Slam the Brakes on Teamster Union Boss Intimidation and Threats
Teamster bosses bullying independent-minded workers to sign self-disparaging letter just to exercise their constitutional rights
Long Island, NY (October 8, 2010) – Two Syosset-based bus drivers have filed federal charges against a local Teamster union for refusing to recognize, without condition, their constitutional right to refrain from formal union membership and instead are intimidating independent-minded workers who exercise that right.
With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the two Acme Bus Corp. drivers filed the charges late last week with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Brooklyn.
Teamsters Local Union 1205 officials are failing to acknowledge without condition the workers’ rights to refrain from formal, full dues-paying union membership established under Foundation-won precedent in the Supreme Court case Communication Workers v. Beck. Instead, Teamster Local 1205 union bosses are forcing nonmember employees to sign a self-disparaging letter characterizing themselves as “dues complainers.”
Bus Drivers Slam the Brakes on Teamster Union Boss Intimidation and Threats
Long Island, NY (October 8, 2010) – Two Syosset-based bus drivers have filed federal charges against a local Teamster union for refusing to recognize, without condition, their constitutional right to refrain from formal union membership and instead are intimidating independent-minded workers who exercise that right.
With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the two Acme Bus Corp. drivers filed the charges late last week with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Brooklyn.
Teamsters Local Union 1205 officials are failing to acknowledge without condition the workers’ rights to refrain from formal, full dues-paying union membership established under Foundation-won precedent in the Supreme Court case Communication Workers v. Beck. Instead, Teamster Local 1205 union bosses are forcing nonmember employees to sign a self-disparaging letter characterizing themselves as “dues complainers.”
In Beck, the Supreme Court held that workers who refrain from formal union membership – while still forced to pay certain union fees as a condition of employment – have the right to refrain from paying union dues spent for activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events. Teamster union bosses are further required to provide an independent breakdown of all forced-dues union expenditures. So far, they have failed to adequately fulfill that requirement.
Meanwhile, the employees are also being forced to illegally subsidize the union bosses’ strike fund even though nonmember employees are not eligible under union rules to receive payments from it.
“Teamsters Local 1205 union bosses need to stop this illegal behavior immediately and cease violating the rights of rank-and-file workers,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Ultimately, the best way to protect the rights of workers in the Empire State is for New York to pass a Right to Work law ending union officials’ power to have workers fired for refusing to pay union dues or fees and making union membership strictly voluntary.”
Worker Advocate: Labor Board’s Discriminatory Rule Change Is Back Door Card Check Provision
Worker Advocate: Labor Board’s Discriminatory Rule Change Is Back Door Card Check Provision
Obama Administration bureaucrats changing rules to enact portion of the Card Check bill that was rejected by Congress
Washington, DC (October 5, 2010) – Late last week, the Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a memorandum to the board’s regional offices establishing new procedures in cases involving union claims that an employee has been fired unlawfully during a union organizing campaign.
The new procedure directs the NLRB’s regional offices to file an injunction in federal court – referred to as a 10(j) injunction for the section it is established under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) – requiring the employer keep a union organizer on payroll until the pending case is resolved. Notably, the new rules protect union organizers during aggressive organizing drives but do nothing for employees who are victims of union official misconduct.
Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation released the following statement regarding the rule change:
“The NLRB Acting General Counsel’s one-sided dictate creates a double standard against employees who want nothing to do with a union.
“For over 40 years, the National Right to Work Foundation has fought for the rights of hundreds of thousands of workers whose rights have been violated by union officials. Foundation attorneys frequently request 10(j) injunctions in cases in which union bosses are committing unfair labor practices against nonmember workers, but NLRB officials ignore those requests in virtually every case.»
To read Mark Mix’s entire statement, click here.
Worker Advocate: Labor Board’s Discriminatory Rule Change Is Back Door Card Check Provision
Washington, DC (October 5, 2010) – Late last week, the Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a memorandum to the board’s regional offices establishing new procedures in cases involving union claims that an employee has been fired unlawfully during a union organizing campaign.
The new procedure directs the NLRB’s regional offices to file an injunction in federal court – referred to as a 10(j) injunction for the section it is established under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) – requiring the employer keep a union organizer on payroll until the pending case is resolved. Notably, the new rules protect union organizers during aggressive organizing drives but do nothing for employees who are victims of union official misconduct.
Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation released the following statement regarding the rule change:
“The NLRB Acting General Counsel’s one-sided dictate creates a double standard against employees who want nothing to do with a union.
“For over 40 years, the National Right to Work Foundation has fought for the rights of hundreds of thousands of workers whose rights have been violated by union officials. Foundation attorneys frequently request 10(j) injunctions in cases in which union bosses are committing unfair labor practices against nonmember workers, but NLRB officials ignore those requests in virtually every case.
“The Acting General Counsel’s quick-snap injunctions rule creates a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ standard that will be used by union organizers to pressure employers into helping push employees into union ranks.
“After Big Labor’s Card Check bill has been successfully blocked for two years in Congress, the Obama Administration is now implementing provisions of the card check bill through the executive branch. This new rule is a shameful political payoff to the union bosses who spent over $1 billion in 2008 electing Obama and forced-unionism supporters to Congress.”
Right to Work on Fox Business: Shady SEIU Fundraising Tactics Escape Political Scrutiny
Foundation President Mark Mix appeared on Fox Business’s "Varney and Company" to discuss the SEIU’s shady political fundraising practices:
For more on this issue, check out Mix’s recent op-ed in The Washington Examiner:
Imagine the outcry if McDonalds executives demanded that franchise owners collect “voluntary” contributions totaling $25,000 for the company’s Political Action Committee (PAC) from employees at every restaurant.
What if the fast food titan’s headquarters followed up with a threat – pay us, or face a $37,500 fine? Do you think this heavy-handed scheme would raise a few eyebrows at the Federal Election Commission (FEC)?
Replace “McDonalds” with “SEIU” in that description and you’ve got a pretty good idea of Big Labor’s latest political fundraising strategy. To meet their ambitious fundraising targets, Service Employees International Union bosses are now threatening to fine any local affiliate that doesn’t meet its PAC contribution requirements.
The only problem with this racket is that FEC guidelines explicitly prohibit organizations from collecting PAC funds by threatening members with financial reprisals . . .
Michigan Child Care Providers Take Their Case to the Airwaves
As we recounted earlier this month, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys are fighting a blatant political payback scheme initiated by Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm to hand over all home-based child-care providers who provide services to state-subsidized low-income families over to government union bosses.
Last week, Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work, and Carrie Schlaud, the courageous lead plaintiff of the providers’ class-action lawsuit against Granholm and the United Autoworker (UAW) and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) unions appeared on the Fox News Channel’s Fox & Friends to discuss the case:
Forced Unionism Scheme’s «Limitless Application»
In the latest issue of the Federalist Society’s Engage journal, National Right to Work Foundation attorney William Messenger discusses two lawsuits challenging schemes in Michigan and Illinois that force unionization on personal care providers and child care providers.
Two principal groups of individuals are currently being subjected to state-imposed representation. The first group is “Personal Care Providers,” who provide home personal care to disabled, chronically ill, or elderly individuals whose care is paid for by state self-directed home and community-based service (“HCBS”) programs established under Medicaid. This care generally includes assistance with daily living activities, such as dressing, grooming, and homemaking. Although the details of state HCBS programs vary, their core feature is that participants have discretion to hire, fire, and supervise their Personal Care Providers. The state subsidizes participants’ costs for hiring a Personal Care Provider and provides counseling to facilitate the process.
….
The second group is “Childcare Providers,” who provide home childcare (i.e., daycare) services to parents whose childcare expenses are subsidized by state programs established under the federal Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF). Childcare Providers include independent contractors who operate daycare businesses from their homes, employees employed in parents’ homes, and relatives willing to watch their grandchildren or other related children in their homes. State programs generally permit participants to hire the private Childcare Provider of their choice, with the state’s role generally limited to paying some or all of their childcare costs.
As Messenger explains in the article, these forced unionism schemes infringe upon the First Amendment rights of compassionate care providers (including grandparents and babysitters) because they are being forced to support political speech and lobbying activities with no vital government interest.
In Michigan, 40,000 child care providers are now forced to pay union dues to joint venture of the United Auto Workers (UAW) and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) unions, and the scheme in Illinois forces approximately 20,000 personal care providers to pay fees to the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). These schemes funnel millions of dollars into union coffers at the expense of the care recipients.
Hopefully, the federal courts will correct the gross injustice done to these tens of thousands of care providers, but these lawsuits have much wider implications. At least 15 other states have similar schemes, and union bosses are on the move to impose their representation on care providers nationwide.
Moreover, if these schemes are upheld, Messenger argues, "any individuals that receive monies from a government program, such as contractors with the government and recipients of Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, subsidized housing, and other government entitlements" could soon find themselves subjected to compulsory union representation.
Read the full article here.
Labor Board Investigation Finds Union Boss Scheme Discriminated Against Nonunion Teachers during Work Performance Hearings
Miami, FL (September 30, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Florida public school teacher successfully challenged a discriminatory policy that prevented nonunion educators from bringing a representative of their choosing to school conferences that can result in disciplinary action.
Shawn Beightol, a veteran chemistry teacher at Michael Krop Senior High School, was told to report to the Miami-Dade County Office of Professional Standards (OPS) to discuss a possible violation of the school’s email policy last October. Although the United Teachers of Dade (UTD) union is the exclusive bargaining agent for the Miami-Dade School District, Beightol refused to associate with the union and is instead a member of the Professional Educators Network of Florida (PENFL), a nonunion teachers association. When Beightol brought a representative from PENFL to the October hearing, school officials refused to allow his advisor to participate, citing a provision in the union’s contract with the district.
Beightol responded by filing charges against union officials and the school district with the help of Foundation attorneys, alleging that this provision unfairly discriminates against nonunion teachers by denying them the opportunity to bring personal representatives to professional hearings. Although UTD members are entitled to union representatives at these conferences, the teachers’ contract – negotiated by union officials with the school district – forbids nonunion representatives from participating. This practice effectively discourages teachers from leaving the UTD or joining a voluntary teacher association by forcing them to join the union for assistance at school conferences.
Florida law explicitly prohibits union officials from causing public employers to discriminate against nonmember employees. Florida’s popular Right to Work Law also guarantees that no employee – public or private – can be coerced into joining a union or paying union dues.
Following an investigation, a hearing officer from the Florida Public Employees Relations Commission concluded that the union’s contract violated state law. The officer recommended that the Commission strike down the union’s discriminatory contract and require UTD officials to post public notices informing teachers of their rights to nonunion representation.
“This policy is nothing more than an underhanded way to weaken workplace protections, including Florida’s popular Right to Work law, that forbid unions from forcing workers to join through coercion or discriminatory workplace practices,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “The Public Employees Relations Commission should take these recommendations to heart and strike down this discriminatory contract immediately.”
FEC Refuses to Issue Stern Warning Against Illegal SEIU Union PAC Fundraising Scheme
Yesterday, former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) chieftain and appointment to President Obama’s "Deficit Panel" Andy Stern was reportedly being investigated by the FBI for his role in a couple of shady dealings while he was at the helm of the forced unionism leviathan. But that wasn’t the only big story coming out yesterday about widespread SEIU union hierarchy corruption during his tumultuous reign. From Ed Barnes on FoxNews.com:
Despite a finding by the Federal Election Commission’s general counsel that the Service Employees International Union violated election law when it required local affiliates to contribute to its political action fund, the FEC’s full board nonetheless quietly voted to overrule its staff attorney and dismissed the original complaint — clearing the way for the union to squeeze its locals to amass a $9 million war chest for the next election.
Moreover, the group that filed the complaint, the National Right to Work Foundation (NRWF), didn’t receive a full explanation of the FEC’s decision in the case until after 111 days had passed, ensuring that its right to file an appeal had lapsed.
…
The NRWF, long a thorn in the side of the 1.8 million-member union, filed its complaint in October 2008, challenging an amendment to the union’s constitution that required each local to contribute $6 per member to the international’s political action committee. Those locals that didn’t comply would be charged the difference between what they owed and what they raised — plus, a 50 percent penalty.
"To us it was a prima facie case for coercion," [National Right to Work President Mark] Mix said. "Plus, it looked like a money laundering scheme as well, because locals would pay the penalties from their general funds into the political action committee. General union treasury funds are not allowed to be used for political purposes," he said.
Frankly, it’s very unfortunate that the FEC seems interested in allowing Big Labor political corruption. As Mark Mix explained in the Washington Examiner earlier this month:
Imagine the outcry if McDonalds executives demanded that franchise owners collect “voluntary” contributions totaling $25,000 for the company’s Political Action Committee (PAC) from employees at every restaurant.
What if the fast food titan’s headquarters followed up with a threat – pay us, or face a $37,500 fine? Do you think this heavy handed scheme would raise a few eyebrows at the Federal Election Commission (FEC)?
Replace “McDonalds” with “SEIU” in that description and you’ve got a pretty good idea of Big Labor’s latest political fundraising strategy. To meet their ambitious fundraising targets, Service Employees International Union bosses are now threatening to fine any local affiliate that doesn’t meet its PAC contribution requirements.
The only problem with this racket is that FEC guidelines explicitly prohibit organizations from collecting PAC funds by threatening members with financial reprisals. SEIU bosses aren’t exactly hiding their intentions, either – they actually wrote this fundraising provision into the union’s constitution at their annual convention.
Citizen Activist Wins Battle to Inform Keystone State Teachers of Their Constitutional Rights
Citizen Activist Wins Battle to Inform Keystone State Teachers of Their Constitutional Rights
Teacher union bosses aimed to keep Pennsylvania’s teachers in the dark
Harrisburg, PA (September 30, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, citizen activist Simon Campbell has bested teacher union bosses in state court over his right to inform Pennsylvania’s nonmember teachers of their constitutional rights regarding union membership and dues payment.
Several years ago, Simon Campbell of Bucks County founded a group dedicated to the goal of making sure all public school children in the state have the legal right to a strike-free education after his own children were forced out of school in the wake of a debilitating union boss-instigated strike.
More recently, Campbell has requested that public school districts disclose the mailing addresses of teachers who have refrained from formal union membership with the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) union, but are still forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment because Pennsylvania does not have Right to Work protections for its workers.
Campbell wanted to advise the teachers about their rights under National Right to Work Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court precedent, such as their right not to subsidize union boss activities other than collective bargaining and contract administration and their right to challenge the union hierarchy’s calculations regarding the amount of forced dues charged to nonmember teachers.
Read the full press release here.
