10th Circuit Agrees With Right to Work Foundation: Utah Unions Have No Right to Payroll Deduction for Politics

But a more effective alternative would have been stopping government payroll deduction for all union dues

Salt Lake City, UT (April 22, 2009) – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit yesterday reversed itself and ruled to uphold a Utah statute prohibiting union officials from using payroll deduction to divert teachers’ and other government workers’ money into union electioneering.

“Utah has a legitimate interest in avoiding the reality or appearance of government entanglement with partisan politics” and Utah’s Voluntary Contributions Act “plainly serves the State’s interest in separating public employment from political activities,” the court held.

The National Right to Work Foundation joined in an amici brief with the Utah-based Sutherland Institute (and others) to defend the Utah statute which had previously been struck down. After initially siding with union attorneys who argued the law somehow violated the constitutional rights of the union, the Tenth Circuit put the case on hold pending the outcome of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling involving a similar Idaho statute.

—

Click here to read the rest of the Foundation’s press release. The Deseret News covered the reversal here.

Salt Lake City, UT (April 22, 2009) – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit yesterday reversed itself and ruled to uphold a Utah statute prohibiting union officials from using payroll deduction to divert teachers’ and other government workers’ money into union electioneering.

“Utah has a legitimate interest in avoiding the reality or appearance of government entanglement with partisan politics” and Utah’s Voluntary Contributions Act “plainly serves the State’s interest in separating public employment from political activities,” the court held.

The National Right to Work Foundation joined in an amici brief with the Utah-based Sutherland Institute (and others) to defend the Utah statute which had previously been struck down. After initially siding with union attorneys who argued the law somehow violated the constitutional rights of the union, the Tenth Circuit put the case on hold pending the outcome of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling involving a similar Idaho statute.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys successfully argued in their briefs in Utah Education Association et al. v. Mark Shurtleff – just as they did at the U.S. Supreme Court in Ysursa v. Pocatello Education Association at al. – that unions have no constitutional right to use government resources to deduct dues from workers’ paychecks.

“The recent Supreme Court’s decision and now this Tenth Circuit ruling makes clear what should have been obvious: union officials have no constitutional right to use government resources to line their pockets,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “It is bad public policy for government bodies essentially to act as bagmen for union political monies.”

“But there was a much more effective way to address this problem. The Utah legislature should simply have banned all union payroll deductions, not just those for narrowly defined political activities,” continued Gleason. “Unfortunately, the definition of politics covered by such laws is so narrow that union bosses are essentially able to continue business as usual.”

Since Utah is a Right to Work state, employees have the right to refrain from union membership and cannot be lawfully compelled to pay any dues whatsoever to a union. Employees who wish to ensure none of their dues are spent to promote a union’s agenda can best do so by exercising their Right to Work.

Employees Ask U.S. Supreme Court to Reinstate RICO Case against UAW Union Organizing Scheme

National Right to Work Foundation urges High Court to allow enforcement of longstanding labor bribery statutes against increasingly common union schemes

Washington, DC (April 21, 2009) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court to uphold workers’ challenge to a secret quid pro quo agreement intended to install the United Auto Workers (UAW) union at Freightliner plants in North and South Carolina.

With free legal aid from the Foundation, five employees at three plants operated by Daimler Trucks subsidiary Freightliner filed a class-action federal racketeering lawsuit in 2006 challenging an illegal scheme in which union officials agreed in advance to significant concessions at the expense of the Freightliner workers at its non-union facilities in North Carolina in exchange for valuable company assistance in organizing those workers.

—

Click here to read the full release.  Download a PDF copy of the petition.  For additional background information about the case, click here.

Washington, DC (April 21, 2009) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court to uphold workers’ challenge to a secret quid pro quo agreement intended to install the United Auto Workers (UAW) union at Freightliner plants in North and South Carolina.

With free legal aid from the Foundation, five employees at three plants operated by Daimler Trucks subsidiary Freightliner filed a class-action federal racketeering lawsuit in 2006 challenging an illegal scheme in which union officials agreed in advance to significant concessions at the expense of the Freightliner workers at its non-union facilities in North Carolina in exchange for valuable company assistance in organizing those workers.

Federal law bars companies from giving “things of value” to unions or union officials, and it is also illegal for company and union agents to negotiate terms and conditions of employment before the union hierarchy has proven a majority of employees actually want it to represent them. But in a secret “Preconditions to Card Check Procedure” pact inked before employees even knew they were a UAW union organizing target, Freightliner and the UAW union expressly agreed to limitations on wages, an increase in the health care costs shouldered by employees, and other concessions.

In return, Freightliner gave the UAW union organizers direct access to propagandize employees at compulsory “captive audience” meetings and to harangue them in company break rooms, granted union organizers access to employees’ private home addresses, agreed not to provide truthful information to employees about the downsides of unionization, and agreed to automatically recognize the union without a secret ballot vote when presented the requisite number of signed union authorization cards.

In such “card check” organizing drives, employees are frequently coerced or misled into signing such cards, which are then counted as “votes.” Workers have also complained that signed cards are difficult to revoke.

In December, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld union lawyers’ motion to dismiss the case. Foundation attorneys argue the lower court erroneously limited “things of value” to only tangible and explicit monetary benefits. But given the millions of dollars unions spend on corporate campaigns to obtain the advantages delivered by Freightliner in this case, the UAW clearly obtained “things of value.” Moreover, the court could have simply remanded for fact finding as to monetary value, which can easily be established.

“We urge the Supreme Court to do what the lower courts have refused: restore the rights of American workers victimized by sweetheart deals between management and union bosses,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation.

The employees seek financial restitution to all employees at the Mount Holly, Gastonia, and Cleveland, North Carolina, facilities in the form of treble damages for all dues seized and earnings lost as a result of the unlawful pact. Additional Freightliner plants known to be covered by the once-secret agreement are located in High Point, North Carolina, and Gaffney, South Carolina.

St. Louis, Missouri (April 13, 2009) – A St. Louis-based AT&T worker has filed federal unfair labor practice charges against a national union for illegal threats in the run-up to an impending national strike.

With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, David McBride of Granite City, Illinois filed charges alleging that Communication Workers of America (CWA) union officials threatened him with legal action if he refused to go on strike and failed to provide him with a federally-mandated audit of union expenditures.

CWA union officials appear to be on the verge of ordering 20,000 employees to abandon their jobs as part of a nationwide strike against AT&T Mobility. However, numerous employees across the United States have contacted the National Right to Work Foundation for legal advice after being falsely informed by CWA officials that they are obligated to participate in the union’s upcoming work stoppage or face severe penalties.

Foundation attorneys have already helped three New Jersey AT&T employees file unfair labor practice charges against CWA Local 1101.

In St. Louis, union officials demanded that McBride sign a “strike assignment form” despite his previous decision to resign from the union. Union officials threatened to “take [him] to court” if McBride refused to participate in the union-instigated strike.

Under the Supreme Court decision Pattern Makers v. NLRB, workers have an absolute right to resign from formal, full dues-paying union membership at any time. Union officials have no legal power to punish employees for resigning from the union and refusing to abandon their jobs during a strike.

Additionally, CWA Local 6300 union officials refused to provide McBride with a financial breakdown of all union expenditures. Because nonmember employees in non-Right to Work states can still be forced to pay union dues for collective bargaining, this disclosure is required to allow nonunion workers to opt-out of union dues unrelated to workplace negotiations.

Union officials have also told CWA union members in Washington, Michigan, Ohio and New Jersey that any attempt to resign from union membership is strictly prohibited. In Ohio, CWA bosses responded to one worker’s inquiry by telling him that he was employed in a “forced union” state. Foundation attorneys anticipate filing additional unfair labor practice charges for these union-abused workers in the coming weeks.

“It’s particularly despicable to threaten workers with legal retaliation if they refuse to abandon their jobs in the midst of an economic crisis,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “All workers should be free to support their families, free from ugly threats by union bosses.”

“The National Right to Work Foundation stands ready to defend the rights of any AT&T employee who is being illegally threatened or coerced by CWA officials,” added Gleason.