Meet the New Boss… Same as the Old Boss: SEIU Regime Change More of a Lateral Move
In the wake of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) boss Andy Stern’s retirement, SEIU Executive Vice President Mary Kay Henry was ushered in as the new chief of the notoriously corrupt and predatory union hierarchy.
Despite the mainstream media’s portrayal of Henry’s coronation as a change in the way SEIU union organizers coerce workers into dues-paying union ranks through intimidation or political deal-making, nothing could be further from the truth.
From National Right to Work’s contribution to BigGovernment.com:
Don’t let the cheery atmosphere surrounding her anointment ease concerns about her nor the SEIU and its agenda; because for her, ObamaCare and its potential for 21.1 million forced unionism conscripts are just the beginning steps for SEIU’s steady march towards domination of U.S. labor markets.
Mary Kay Henry’s intentions to further radicalize the labor movement and the American economy are clearer than Stern’s vision. With the hundreds of millions of union dues and fees flowing into SEIU’s treasury, she has the financial fuel needed to fund her ambitious desires…
Mary Kay Henry has been credited with most of SEIU’s membership growth for more than a decade; however, that growth did not come from the grassroots; it was top down.
From 1996-2007, SEIU claimed 900,000 “new members” and Mary Kay Henry’s healthcare division provided almost all its growth…
In 2006, Mary Kay Henry laid her plan on the table:
More central power is needed, said Henry. “We believe the American labor movement needs to move beyond voluntarism [joining voluntarily?] … SEIU aims to increase the union rate of health care workers from its current 20 percent to 50 percent.[iii]
SEIU’s game plan is simple and reminiscent of the 1950s: create the allusion that it has the power to subjugate employers by region and couple it with SEIU’s willingness to ignore election rules to intimidate and control almost every elected and appointed Democrat in the United States. If the plan works, SEIU organizations gain control of workers in an entire region of the country.
After creating mega-locals, SEIU begins to sign-up smaller workplaces and move these units into the appropriate mega-local conflating contracts into its master contract for the region.
In the end, SEIU’s mega-local contract spans across numerous states and worksites making it virtually impossible for individual workers to mount a successful decertification or deauthorization NLRB election.
(Emphasis in original)
To view the National Right to Work Committee’s latest video, "SEIU’s Mary Kay Henry: Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss"click here or you can watch it below:
New Jersey Governor: Forced Unionism «Is About the Accumulation and Exercise of Raw Political Power»
In a political culture in which most politicians fear Big Labor’s massive forced dues electioneering machine, it’s refreshing to see an elected official articulately and passionately condemn compulsory unionism. That’s just what New Jersey Governor Chris Christie did last week at a town hall meeting.
In the video below, listen to Gov. Christie explain the evil of forcing teachers to pay union fees (roughly 85 percent of full union dues) just to exercise their right to refrain from union membership.
New Jersey employees have the limited right — secured by National Right to Work Foundation-won cases at the US Supreme Court — to pay only the portion of the fees that union bosses can prove is spent on bargaining and contract administration.
In Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977), the Court ruled that compulsory dues for politics violates the First Amendment. In Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986), the Court agreed with Foundation attorneys and unanimously held that union officials must provide employees with an independently verified breakdown of the union’s expenditures and that employees must have the opportunity to challenge the calculation of their forced fees.
Unfortunately, Christie stops short of calling for the Garden State to pass a Right to Work law, which would make union association 100 percent voluntary. But he’s right on when he explains that the teacher union officials are motivated by "the accumulation and exercise of raw political power." Something to think about as Congress considers rewriting states’ employment laws by federal fiat.
Obama Recess Appointee Refuses to Recuse Himself in Twelve of Thirteen Cases Despite Clear Bias, Conflicts of Interest
Obama Recess Appointee Refuses to Recuse Himself in Twelve of Thirteen Cases Despite Clear Bias, Conflicts of Interest
New federal labor board member and former SEIU union lawyer Craig Becker thumbs his nose at much-touted Obama ethics policy
Washington, DC (June 9, 2010) – Craig Becker, President Barack Obama’s controversial recess appointee to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), responded this week to 13 motions for his recusal filed by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys in cases pending before the Board.
After President Obama installed Becker on the NLRB in late March, Foundation attorneys quickly filed recusal motions in all Foundation-supported cases due to Becker’s extreme level of hostility against the Foundation and its legal arguments for workers’ rights, even when the NLRB or United States Supreme Court have agreed and ruled against unions for their abusive practices. Additionally, some of the cases directly involve affiliates of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Becker’s employer up to the date of his recess appointment.
But Becker has only agreed to recuse himself in Dana Corp., one pending case in which Becker’s conflict of interest was so great even he could not ignore it. In that case, Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges against an employer and the United Auto Workers (UAW) union for illegal pre-recognition bargaining. In exchange for active company assistance during a coercive card check organizing campaign, UAW union officials made explicit concessions as to workers’ wages and benefits. Becker himself coauthored a joint brief for the UAW and AFL-CIO union hierarchy in that case.
Obama Recess Appointee Refuses to Recuse Himself in Twelve of Thirteen Cases Despite Clear Bias, Conflicts of Interest
Washington, DC (June 9, 2010) – Craig Becker, President Barack Obama’s controversial recess appointee to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), responded this week to 13 motions for his recusal filed by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys in cases pending before the Board.
After President Obama installed Becker on the NLRB in late March, Foundation attorneys quickly filed recusal motions in all Foundation-supported cases due to Becker’s extreme level of hostility against the Foundation and its legal arguments for workers’ rights, even when the NLRB or United States Supreme Court have agreed and ruled against unions for their abusive practices. Additionally, some of the cases directly involve affiliates of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Becker’s employer up to the date of his recess appointment.
But Becker has only agreed to recuse himself in Dana Corp., one pending case in which Becker’s conflict of interest was so great even he could not ignore it. In that case, Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges against an employer and the United Auto Workers (UAW) union for illegal pre-recognition bargaining. In exchange for active company assistance during a coercive card check organizing campaign, UAW union officials made explicit concessions as to workers’ wages and benefits. Becker himself coauthored a joint brief for the UAW and AFL-CIO union hierarchy in that case.
However, Becker will not recuse himself in a related line of cases in which union officials have devised a legal strategy to overturn a landmark 2007 NLRB decision won by Foundation attorneys also concerning the UAW’s card check campaign at Dana Corp. In that decision, the Board granted employees the ability to demand a secret ballot election to toss out union officials from their workplace within 45 days after an employer recognizes a monopoly bargaining agent by card check. Becker denies having pre-judged the attempts to overturn that Dana decision despite a long career of advocating an extreme version of forced unionism that considers secret ballot elections “profoundly undemocratic” and despite having authored an amicus brief in that case opposing granting employees the opportunity to petition for decertification of unions recognized by card check.
Likewise, Becker has a long track record of personal bias towards the Foundation. Becker admits to having used “strong language” against the Foundation in published articles, but he ignores the fact that he once wrote that the Foundation only “purports to represent employees” even though it is patently obvious that Foundation staff attorneys have represented employees in hundreds of federal court and NLRB cases. Becker even has blamed the U.S. Supreme Court for having a “virtual obsession” with Foundation-assisted cases and criticized the NLRB’s General Counsel for putting cases like Dana before the Board.
Finally, Becker has announced a weak standard for recusal in cases involving SEIU affiliates. He ignores the financial dependence of the SEIU International, his former employer, on local affiliates and refuses to adopt the more stringent federal judge standard for recusal used by current NLRB Chair Wilma Liebman in cases concerning affiliates of the Teamster union, her former employer before being installed on the Board by President Bill Clinton.
“By announcing his weak recusal standards, Craig Becker has made a mockery of the much-touted Obama ethics pledge,” explained Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation.
“He has pre-judged the secret ballot, and he will now decide a case that could take away from workers the limited ability to use the secret ballot to get rid of an unwanted union foisted on them by coercive card check schemes. He has helped orchestrate the legal strategy for SEIU affiliates across the country, but he has only found fit to recuse himself in one case so far,” continued Mix. “Craig Becker’s recusal standards would be comical if the livelihoods of hardworking Americans were not at stake.”
Legal Foundation Offers Free Assistance to Nurses Who Won’t Abandon Their Patients during Looming Strike
Minneapolis, MN (June 09, 2010) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a legal aid organization that assists employees nationwide, is announcing an offer of free legal assistance to any Minneapolis nurses who do not wish to participate in an impending union-instigated strike.
According to recent press reports, the Minnesota Nurses Association (MNA) union has decided to initiate a strike against 14 hospitals in the Twin Cities area. Some 4000 nurses either voted against or did not vote at all when asked to walk out on their patients.
Ray LaJeunesse, Vice President and Legal Director of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement:
“Given the results of this election, many Minneapolis nurses may wish to work during the impending strike to ensure 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 not participate in a union-instigated strike. A more detailed description of every nurse’s legal rights can be found on the Foundation’s website at https://www.nrtw.org/a/a_7_p.htm
“Foundation attorneys are ready to advise Twin Cities 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 MNA 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 or fines.
• Workers have the right to sign a decertification petition to hold a secret ballot election to eject union officials from their workplace.
Federal Labor Board Announces Prosecution of Local Teamster Union Bosses For Threats Against Workers
Federal Labor Board Announces Prosecution of Local Teamster Union Bosses For Threats Against Workers
Teamster union officials illegally told employees who refused to toe the union line that they would be fired
Seattle, WA (June 3, 2010) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Seattle has filed a federal complaint against local Teamster union officials for intimidating employees who exercised their limited legal rights to refrain from full dues paying union membership as a condition of employment.
The complaint stems from unfair labor practice charges filed by Alan Ritchey, Inc. employees Gayle May and Patricia Allen – acting for dozens of other similarly-situated employees of the mail transportation equipment repair and service center facility in Auburn – against Teamsters Local 117 union bosses.
With help from the National Right to Work Foundation, May and Allen filed charges after certain employees received a letter from union officials threatening them with job loss if they did not within three days join the union or declare again their nonmember status.
Federal Labor Board Announces Prosecution of Local Teamster Union Bosses For Threats Against Workers
Seattle, WA (June 3, 2010) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Seattle has filed a federal complaint against local Teamster union officials for intimidating employees who exercised their limited legal rights to refrain from full dues paying union membership as a condition of employment.
The complaint stems from unfair labor practice charges filed by Alan Ritchey, Inc. employees Gayle May and Patricia Allen – acting for dozens of other similarly-situated employees of the mail transportation equipment repair and service center facility in Auburn – against Teamsters Local 117 union bosses.
With help from the National Right to Work Foundation, May and Allen filed charges after certain employees received a letter from union officials threatening them with job loss if they did not within three days join the union or declare again their nonmember status.
In the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court case Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988), the Court held that workers who refrain from formal union membership have the right to refrain from paying union dues spent for activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events.
At about the same time, other Alan Ritchey employees filed a petition seeking a deauthorization election which would strip union officials of their forced dues powers.
Fearing lack of support, Teamsters Local 117 union lawyers filed charges against the National Right to Work Foundation in a desperate attempt to stall the employee vote that would have rescinded their forced dues privileges, but the NLRB dismissed the union bosses’ unwarranted and frivolous charges.
“Independent-minded employees should not be forced to subsidize Teamsters Local 117 union thugs who threaten them with firings for exercising their rights,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director of the National Right to Work Foundation. “That is why Washington needs a state Right to Work law protecting workers from union boss intimidation and abuse.”
The NLRB’s complaint against Teamsters Local 117 union bosses will be heard before an administrative law judge in the Jackson Federal Building in Seattle on August 3.
Federal Labor Board to Prosecute Hospital Union for Illegal Bargaining in Secret Agreement
Houston, TX (June 03, 2010) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued a formal complaint against the California Nurses Association (CNA) union and Tenet Healthcare Corporation (THC) for illegally negotiating contractual provisions before the union received majority support from Tenet employees. The complaint was prompted by unfair labor practice charges filed by several nurses at the Cypress Fairbanks Medical Center with the help of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys.
According to the NLRB’s complaint, Tenet Corporation and union officials agreed to a so-called “Election Procedures Agreement” (EPA) before the CNA’s presence was put to a vote by Cypress Fairbanks nurses. Under the terms of the secret agreement, Tenet and CNA officials committed to mandatory third-party arbitration if they could not agree to a contract within 90 days.
Federal labor law prohibits company and union officials from negotiating a contract until a union receives majority support from the company’s employees. This requirement is intended to prevent union officials from undercutting workers’ rights or negotiating unfavorable wages and working conditions in return for organizing assistance from an employer. At Cypress Fairbanks, CNA officials agreed to the EPA – including the binding arbitration provisions – with Tenet Corporation before they received the consent of Cypress Fairbanks nurses to negotiate on their behalf.
The CNA’s organizing drive at Cypress Fairbanks was also marred by several provisions in the EPA designed to quash anti-union dissent. Tenet managers were forbidden from truthfully answering hospital employees’ questions about unionization, and employees who opposed a union presence were prevented from using company facilities to express their views. CNA organizers, on the other hand, were given wide-ranging access to company grounds to facilitate unionization, as well as a list of employees’ home addresses. Tenet settled earlier Foundation-supported charges by granting employees opposed to unionization equal access to its facilities.
The NLRB’s complaint will be heard by an administrative law judge.
“CNA operatives foisted themselves on Cypress Fairbanks nurses through a backroom deal designed to impose unionization,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “It is telling that these union bosses are so intent on forcing themselves into nurses’ workplaces that they were willing to violate the rights of the very employees they claim to represent.”
Will Former SEIU Lawyer and Current NLRB Member Craig Becker Adhere to His Ethics Pledge?
Here’s an update on National Right to Work’s ongoing effort to hold Big Labor-affiliated Obama appointees accountable.
Following the initial round of filings, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have now filed supplements to their motions asking National Labor Relations Board Member Craig Becker to recuse himself from pending cases. In addition to the former SEIU and AFL-CIO union lawyer’s clear bias and hostility toward the Foundation, Becker’s signed Ethics Pledge should preclude his participation in cases in which he and his clients had direct involvement. The relevant portion of the Ethics Pledge:
I will not for a period of 2 years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.
In one of the cases in which Becker should recuse himself, SEIU affiliate Service Workers United have asked the NLRB to overturn the landmark 2007 decisions Dana Corp. Won by Foundation attorneys, Dana held that workers have 45 days to demand a secret ballot election to toss out an unwanted union after the union achieved monopoly bargaining status through the intimidating card check process.
But Becker actually submitted a legal brief to the Board on behalf of the AFL-CIO and UAW in that very case. It would be highly unethical for Becker to rule on the validity of a prior Board case in which he served as counsel.
While his controversial nomination was stalled in the Senate, Becker also promised to recuse himself from cases involving his former employer, the radical SEIU union. The real test of his ethics, however, comes with cases involving SEIU affiliates and locals.
As Foundation attorney Glenn Taubman explains in one of the motion supplements, in the 2009 Supreme Court case Locke v. Karass the SEIU International (Becker’s former employer until the very day of his recess appointment) admitted to operating "a ‘pooling’ scheme to fund, and thereby control, the litigation of all of its local unions."
In the present case, Foundation attorneys have asked the NLRB to review a case involving SEIU Local 121RN union officials’ threats to nurses of financial penalties and even arrest for refusing to abandon their patients during a union-ordered strike.
Will Becker adhere to the plain language of the ethics pledge and recuse himself from these cases which are substantially related to his former employment? Unfortunately, the precedent in the Obama Administration isn’t encouraging.
Federal Labor Board Forces Recalcitrant Union to Allow Workers to Cut Off Union Dues
Hudson, OH (May 27, 2010) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, Janet Barlow and two of her First Student coworkers have forced Ohio Association of Public School Employees (OAPSE) Local 791 union officials to settle unfair labor practice charges. The agreement, which was originally proposed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), requires union officials to post notices informing First Student employees of their workplace rights and to allow nonunion workers to opt out of all union dues.
Because Ohio lacks a Right to Work law, employees throughout the state can be forced to pay certain union dues as a condition of employment. After OAPSE officials obstructed Barlow’s attempt to assert her constitutional right not to pay union dues for politics, however, Barlow initiated a so-called deauthorization drive to strip union officials of their powers to collect mandatory dues from First Student employees.
In February 2010, Barlow and her coworkers voted overwhelmingly to reject the forced-dues clause in OAPSE’s contract, allowing workers to opt-out of union dues at any time. Despite this result, OAPSE officials refused to allow nonunion workers to revoke their dues authorization forms, claiming that the employees’ actions were “untimely.”
First Student employees Jack Hurst and Dennis McConnaughey responded by filing additional unfair labor practice charges with the NLRB. Instead of contesting these charges, OAPSE officials agreed to a settlement brokered by the NLRB that requires union officials to allow any employee to stop paying union dues and revoke their dues authorization forms. The settlement also requires the union to post public notices informing First Student employees of their workplace rights.
“Revoking a union’s forced-dues privileges is an uphill battle to begin with, but even after they lost the election, scofflaw OAPSE bosses refused to acknowledge workers’ rights to stop paying union dues,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Employees shouldn’t have to jump through this many legal hoops just to protect their hard-earned paychecks, which is why Ohio should make union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary by adopting a Right to Work law.”
