Washington, DC (August 9, 2010) – The National Right to Work Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal aid to employees, today asked United States Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct an investigation into National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recess appointee Craig Becker’s participation in cases involving his former employer, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

Earlier this summer, Right to Work attorneys filed more than a dozen recusal motions against Becker, who served as associate general counsel for the SEIU and AFL-CIO before he was appointed to the NLRB during a Congressional recess. As the SEIU’s in-house lawyer, Becker litigated against Right to Work Foundation clients and developed legal strategies for SEIU local affiliates across the country. His published writings also indicate a strong level of hostility to the Foundation’s employee-oriented legal aid program.

Foundation attorneys asked Becker to step aside from any case involving Foundation-assisted workers, the SEIU, or its subordinate affiliates. Despite these apparent conflicts of interest, Becker has refused to recuse himself in every case but one.

Only the Attorney General or his appropriate designee has the authority under the Executive Order to investigate any violations of the Obama Administration ethics pledge, which Becker signed. The pledge explicitly forbids any appointee from involving themselves with a former employer for no less than two years.

Becker argues that he may participate in cases involving SEIU affiliates because the national and local unions are “separate and distinct legal entit[ies].” The SEIU’s own constitution, however, considers local affiliates “constituent subordinate bodies” of the national union. Moreover, in 2009 over 85 percent of the SEIU’s receipts came from a per capita tax on the locals’ membership dues and fees. The national union even has the power to assume control over its locals if they do not conform to International policies.

The Foundation’s letter to Holder also notes Becker’s close involvement in the SEIU’s national legal strategy for corralling healthcare workers into unions. Wade Rathke, a former SEIU local union boss and founder of ACORN, praised Becker’s work in this field. As Rathke explained, Becker’s “role was often behind the scenes devising the strategy with the organizers and lawyers, writing the briefs for others to file, and putting all of the pieces together.” Becker’s “separate legal entity” analysis fails to account for this kind of relationship that actually exists between the SEIU and its local affiliates.

“If Craig Becker’s shaky analysis stands, the Obama Administration’s much-touted ethics pledge clearly is not worth the paper it is printed on,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Independent-minded workers who dare to challenge the SEIU’s coercive practices deserve a fair hearing, but how can they get that from the very same union’s former top lawyer?”

Washington, DC (August 6, 2010) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable organization that assists employees nationwide, has announced an offer of free legal assistance to any Washington, DC nurses who do not wish to participate in an impending union-instigated strike at the Washington Hospital Center.

On August 3, Nurses United of the National Capital Area union officials declared a strike against the Washington Hospital Center. Although the date of the strike has yet to be determined, media reports indicate that a majority of eligible nurses either voted against the strike or didn’t vote at all. However, union officials seem intent on striking, which will take place as contract negotiations with the hospital continue to stall.

Ray LaJeunesse, Vice President and Legal Director of the National Right to Work Foundation, responded to the union’s strike threat by issuing the following statement on the nurses’ legal rights:

“Many DC nurses may wish to work during the strike to ensure their patients receive medical attention. Nurses who want to continue working must be made aware of their workplace rights, including the right to resign from union membership and the right to refrain from participating in a union-instigated strike. A detailed description of every nurse’s legal rights is available on the Foundation’s website at https://www.nrtw.org/a/a_7_p.htm.

“Foundation attorneys are prepared to advise nurses about their workplace rights. We are also prepared to provide free legal assistance to any nurses who are subjected to union harassment or retaliation for working during this or any subsequent strike initiated by union officials. You can call the Foundation toll free at 800-336-3600 or request free legal assistance via email at [email protected].

“The National Right to Work Foundation is committed to helping nurses who wish to continue working rather than participate in a union-instigated strike,” continued LaJeunesse. “Nurses must assert their legal rights to ensure they aren’t subjected to draconian internal union discipline for choosing to remain on the job, and Foundation staff attorneys stand ready to assist them.”

Under Supreme Court precedent and federal law:

• Workers have the right to resign from union membership at any time.

• Workers have the right to go to work even if the union is on strike. If a worker chooses to work during a strike, he or she must first resign from union membership to avoid union disciplinary action such as fines.

• After a union’s monopoly bargaining agreement with their employer expires, workers have the right to sign a decertification petition for a secret ballot election to eject union officials from their workplace.

Faced with a looming strike on June 10, 2010, several Minneapolis nurses refused to follow union boss marching orders and instead stayed on the job to care for their patients. Although they resigned their membership before the strike took place, three nurses were threatened with union disciplinary hearings for refusing to walk off the job. With the help of Right to Work attorneys, these nurses have now filed unfair labor practice charges to hold union officials accountable for their heavy-handed intimidation tactics. Here’s a video report on the incident from a local Minneapolis station:

For related coverage, check out articles from Minnesota Public Radio and The Minnesota Star-Tribune. You can also read the Foundation’s press release on the incident here. 

The Right to Work Foundation has also extended an offer of free legal aid to any nurses facing similar union "disciplinary hearings." Interested parties should use the contact information provided here to determine if they’re eligible for assistance. 

UPDATE: On Monday, August 2, Foundation attorneys filed another round of charges against the MNA union on behalf of Susan Clark, a nurse who was never informed of her right to leave the union to avoid participating in the recent Minneapolis hospital strike. A copy of Clark’s charges can be found here (.pdf). 

Minneapolis, MN (July 29, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, three Minneapolis nurses have filed federal unfair labor practice charges against the Minnesota Nurses Association (MNA) union after MNA officials illegally threatened them with disciplinary action for refusing to participate in a recent strike. Foundation attorneys anticipate filing additional charges within the next several days.

Under the 1985 Supreme Court decision Pattern Makers v. National Labor Relations Board, workers have the right to resign from union membership. Although workers can still be fired for failing to pay union dues, nurses and other employees who exercise their right to refrain from formal union membership cannot be subjected to internal union discipline or compelled to participate in union activities, including strikes. Such union “discipline” often includes punitive fines, which can reach tens of thousands of dollars.

Despite these safeguards, MNA officials are threatening to discipline nurses who resigned from the union before the June 10, 2010 strike. Nurses who left the union received letters from the MNA on July 23 notifying them of an upcoming union disciplinary hearing for working during the strike. The letters also stated that nurses who didn’t participate in the strike are “subject to reprimand” from MNA operatives.

In early June, the Right to Work Foundation announced an offer of free legal assistance to any nurses who wished to resign their union membership to avoid participating in the MNA work stoppage or felt threatened or coerced into joining the union strike. Right to Work attorneys know from experience that workers who refuse to abandon their jobs during a union-instigated strike often face threats and retaliation from union officials.

“Attempting to drag these brave nurses into a kangaroo court is nothing more than a tired union boss intimidation tactic,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “All workers – including medical professionals – have the right to resign their formal union membership and continue working rather than be ordered off the job by union operatives.”

The nurses’ charges will now be investigated by the National Labor Relations Board.

Airline Workers Challenge Federal Ruling on Sham Transportation Unionization Election Procedures

Appeal contests federal district court ruling that upheld new policy stacking the deck in favor of forced unionization of railway and airline employees

Washington, DC (July 22, 2010) – With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, five Delta Air Lines employees have appealed a U.S. District Court judge’s decision to uphold a major rule change on how a union is imposed on railway and airline industry workers.

In June, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Paul Friedman refused to impose an injunction halting the new unionization election procedures, which were hastily instituted over the objections of National Mediation Board Chair Elizabeth Dougherty.

The two NMB members who approved the new rule, Harry Hoglander and Linda Puchala, are former union officials with the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) and Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) unions, respectively. Both unions are a major part of an American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) union-led coalition that urged the NMB to discard its election policy of 75 years.

The new procedure stacks the deck in favor of unionization by granting a union monopoly bargaining power over railway or airline industry workers if the union acquires support from just a bare majority of eligible workers in an election, no matter how few actually vote. This means that a small bloc of workers could force union boss “representation” on the whole group rather than having a true majority of all workers deciding for themselves.

Read the full release by clicking here.

Washington, DC (July 22, 2010) – With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, five Delta Air Lines employees have appealed a U.S. District Court judge’s decision to uphold a major rule change on how a union is imposed on railway and airline industry workers.

In June, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Paul Friedman refused to impose an injunction halting the new unionization election procedures, which were hastily instituted over the objections of National Mediation Board Chair Elizabeth Dougherty.

The two NMB members who approved the new rule, Harry Hoglander and Linda Puchala, are former union officials with the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) and Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) unions, respectively. Both unions are a major part of an American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) union-led coalition that urged the NMB to discard its election policy of 75 years.

The new procedure stacks the deck in favor of unionization by granting a union monopoly bargaining power over railway or airline industry workers if the union acquires support from just a bare majority of eligible workers in an election, no matter how few actually vote. This means that a small bloc of workers could force union boss “representation” on the whole group rather than having a true majority of all workers deciding for themselves.

The five Delta workers and similarly situated employees in the railway and airline industries could soon find themselves forced into fees-paying ranks against their will. There are ongoing unionization efforts at Delta by the International Association of Machinists (IAM) and AFA unions.

Foundation attorneys contend that the new rule is unconstitutional because it violates the workers’ rights of freedom of association and due process, especially when the union can only demonstrate support from a minority of workers in a class or craft.

Unlike private sector workers covered by the National Labor Relations Act, nonmember employees in the railway and airline industries are not protected by the Right to Work laws in Georgia, where Delta is headquartered, and 21 other states. Furthermore, the rule change is especially troubling given the complicated bureaucratic hoops these workers must jump through to remove an unwanted union.

“Legal disputes over terms of employment are too often depicted as battles between union bosses and management,” said Patrick Semmens, National Right to Work Foundation Legal Information Director. “We believe the district court erred in ignoring the impact of these new election procedures on individual employees, whose right to bargain individually with their employers could now be tossed aside by a stealth organizing campaign undertaken by professional union organizers.”