Seattle, WA (July 26, 2012) – With free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a Sandy, Oregon, bus driver’s case before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has taken yet another dramatic turn.

On Monday, a NLRB Regional Director revoked a federal settlement reached between the agency and Teamsters Local 206 union officials after union officials made a mockery of federal labor law and repeatedly violated the settlement.

The legal challenge is part of an ongoing legal controversy involving the union and First Student bus driver Richard Harmon, who resigned from formal union membership in Teamsters Local 206 in January 2011.

Because Oregon does not have Right to Work protections making union affiliation completely voluntary, Harmon is still forced to pay part of forced union dues to keep his job.

Despite Harmon’s resignation, Local 206 union officials continued to confiscate full union dues from his paychecks, failed to inform workers of their right to refrain from formal union membership, and failed to provide a legally-required independently-audited breakdown of union expenditures informing workers of what union dues and fees they can be forced to pay.

In September 2011, Harmon forced a settlement of his unfair labor practice charge with Local 206 union officials. However, union officials continued to refuse to provide an adequate audited breakdown of local and other affiliate union expenditures. Harmon filed another charge in late December.

A hearing is scheduled for October 2.

«For years, Teamster union officials have been keeping workers in the dark about their rights in order to keep their forced dues gravy train going,» said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. «Local 206 union officials’ actions have made a mockery of federal labor law and once again underscore the need for Oregon to pass state Right to Work protections for its workers.»

Worker Advocate Testifies Before Congress Regarding Obama Big Labor Paybacks

Foundation staff attorney helps expose out of control Obama Labor Board

Washington, DC (July 25, 2012) – This morning, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorney William Messenger is testifying before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.

The subcommittee, which is chaired by Rep. Phil Roe (R-TN), is holding the hearing entitled «Examining Proposals to Strengthen the National Labor Relations Act.» The hearing is located in room 2175 of the Rayburn House Office Building and is scheduled to start at 10 a.m. EDT.

Update: A transcript of Messenger’s testimony can be viewed here (pdf).

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (July 25, 2012) – This morning, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorney William Messenger is testifying before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.

The subcommittee, which is chaired by Rep. Phil Roe (R-TN), is holding the hearing entitled «Examining Proposals to Strengthen the National Labor Relations Act.» The hearing is located in room 2175 of the Rayburn House Office Building and is scheduled to start at 10 a.m. EDT.

The hearing is focused on the recent actions of President Barack Obama’s National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which has issued many decisions undermining worker protections.

For example, in 2011, the Board struck down Foundation-won precedent giving workers a chance to request a secret-ballot election after their workplace is unionized by a coercive «card check» organizing campaign. The Board also recently has issued several decisions making it easier for unions to push employees into unionization.

Committee members have sponsored legislation such as the Secret Ballot Protection Act and the RAISE Act to roll back some of the Board’s destructive decisions.

«Because the Obama Board’s current makeup is favorable to forced unionism, Big Labor is having a field day,» stated Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. «The National Right to Work Foundation stands poised to help America’s workers in the face of this out of control federal agency.»

Update: A transcript of Messenger’s testimony can be viewed here (pdf).

Worker Advocate Asks Federal Labor Board to Uphold Precedent Disallowing Forced Unionization of Grad Students

Foundation files brief supporting university teaching assistants’ and graduate students’ First Amendment freedom of association

Washington, DC (July 24, 2012) – The National Right to Work Foundation has filed a brief with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) asking the Board to uphold its own precedent that disallows union officials from corralling university graduate students into unwanted union affiliation.

Foundation staff attorneys filed the amicus curiae brief with the NLRB in a case involving United Autoworkers (UAW) union organizers’ attempts to unionize graduate students at New York University and the Polytechnic Institute of New York University and ultimately force them to pay union dues.

Foundation attorneys argue that universities do not fit the self-styled industrial model of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) – the federal law governing private-sector labor relations for non-managerial workers – a conclusion of the U.S. Supreme Court in NLRB v. Yeshiva University (1980).

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (July 24, 2012) – The National Right to Work Foundation has filed a brief with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) asking the Board to uphold its own precedent that disallows union officials from corralling university graduate students into unwanted union affiliation.

Foundation staff attorneys filed the amicus curiae brief with the NLRB in a case involving United Autoworkers (UAW) union organizers’ attempts to unionize graduate students at New York University and the Polytechnic Institute of New York University and ultimately force them to pay union dues.

Foundation attorneys argue that universities do not fit the self-styled industrial model of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) – the federal law governing private-sector labor relations for non-managerial workers – a conclusion of the U.S. Supreme Court in NLRB v. Yeshiva University (1980).

Foundation attorneys disassemble the union lawyers’ arguments for new precedent that would establish teaching assistants and other graduate students as employees of a university, because grades are the central form of compensation for graduate students who are paid to teach, research, or perform temporary work. Foundation attorneys further question whether grades would ultimately become a mandatory subject of monopoly bargaining if paid graduate students were treated as employees for purposes of unionization.

«While the UAW may have Marxist dreams that students are ‘workers’ (as opposed to students), who will be in the vanguard of an economic revolution when the workers of the world unite, the fact remains that graduate students are students and not employees, and have little commonality of interest with most employees,» the Foundation pointed out in its brief.

Foundation attorneys also argue that allowing union officials monopoly bargaining power over all teaching assistants would violate the First Amendment freedom of association rights of dissenting teaching assistants, thereby undermining academic freedom.

Earlier this month, Foundation staff attorneys filed a similar brief with the NLRB in a case involving Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh/Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 38061 union organizers’ attempt to unionize professors at Point Park University in Pittsburgh.

«Union officials’ repeated ham-handed attempts to corral graduate students and university professors into unwanted union affiliation and force them to pay dues for unwanted ‘representation’ can only be explained as that Big Labor sees the Board’s current makeup favorable to forced unionism,» stated Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. «This case shows that union officials will stop at nothing to collect forced dues from anyone possible, even unsuspecting graduate students.»

AT&T Workers Petition U.S. Supreme Court to Overturn Union Exemption from Identity Theft Laws

Judge ruled that North Carolina identity protections don’t apply to union bosses who retaliated against nonmembers by publicly posting social security numbers

Washington, DC (July 19, 2012) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a group of 13 North Carolina-based AT&T (NYSE: T) employees is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review an identity theft case involving federal preemption.

In the fall of 2007, Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 3602 union president John Glenn maliciously posted the names and social security numbers of 33 AT&T employees on a publicly accessible bulletin board at the company’s facility in Burlington, N.C.

All the employees whose names and personal information were posted in a hallway close to the building entrance, accessible to employees and nonemployees alike, had exercised their freedom under the state’s Right to Work law to resign from CWA union membership and cease paying union dues.

Click here to read the full release.

Washington, DC (July 19, 2012) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a group of 13 North Carolina-based AT&T (NYSE: T) employees is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review an identity theft case involving federal preemption.

In the fall of 2007, Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 3602 union president John Glenn maliciously posted the names and social security numbers of 33 AT&T employees on a publicly accessible bulletin board at the company’s facility in Burlington, N.C.

All the employees whose names and personal information were posted in a hallway close to the building entrance, accessible to employees and nonemployees alike, had exercised their freedom under the state’s Right to Work law to resign from CWA union membership and cease paying union dues.

In North Carolina, it is a serious offense for a business or nonprofit organization to publicly reveal someone’s name in combination with his or her social security number. Per the North Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act (ITPA), exposing any person to identity theft in this way carries a fine of up to $5,000 per violation.

In June 2008, AT&T employee Jason Fisher and 15 other employees, represented by Foundation attorneys, filed a lawsuit against Local 3602 and its parent unions in state court.

In an unprecedented decision, both the trial court and the state court of appeals went out of their way to exempt union bosses from North Carolina’s identity theft law. Both courts adopted an argument that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) preempts the ITPA, and consequently union bosses may not be punished by state authorities for exposing the workers’ private information to the public.

The case has now been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court where Foundation staff attorneys argue that the NLRA does not preempt the ITPA.

«If the U.S. Supreme Court does not overturn the lower courts’ rulings, workers in North Carolina who exercise their right to refrain from union affiliation will be susceptible to this ugly type of union boss retaliation,» said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. «The Court’s inaction would also make a mockery of federal labor law, which purports to ‘protect’ workers but really protects union boss intimidation, and could be used to overturn state laws protecting workers across the country.»

Worker Slaps Construction Union Bosses with Federal Charge for Job Discrimination

Electrical worker union officials obstruct worker from getting work

Chicago, IL (July 19, 2012) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a nonunion Chicago-area construction worker has filed a federal charge against the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and two of its local affiliate unions for discriminating against him on account of his union membership status.

Construction worker John Lugo filed the charge against the IBEW Local 697 and IBEW Local 601 unions with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on Monday.

Because IBEW union bosses claim monopoly bargaining privileges over all the workers in his workplaces, Lugo, who refrains from formal union membership, is still forced to accept union officials’ so-called «representation» and go through the union’s hiring halls to find employment.

Federal labor law provides that union bosses must «fairly represent» workers, including those who have exercised their right to refrain from union membership, if union bosses claim exclusive representational powers over the workers.

Click here to read the full release.

Chicago, IL (July 19, 2012) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, a nonunion Chicago-area construction worker has filed a federal charge against the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and two of its local affiliate unions for discriminating against him on account of his union membership status.

Construction worker John Lugo filed the charge against the IBEW Local 697 and IBEW Local 601 unions with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on Monday.

Because IBEW union bosses claim monopoly bargaining privileges over all the workers in his workplaces, Lugo, who refrains from formal union membership, is still forced to accept union officials’ so-called «representation» and go through the union’s hiring halls to find employment.

Federal labor law provides that union bosses must «fairly represent» workers, including those who have exercised their right to refrain from union membership, if union bosses claim exclusive representational powers over the workers.

However, because Lugo exercised his right to refrain from formal union membership, IBEW union officials require him to jump through extra hoops to obtain employment through the union hiring hall. Even after Lugo completes the extra requirements, IBEW union officials actively obstruct him from obtaining work, making it difficult for Lugo to provide for himself and his family.

«If IBEW union bosses have a problem with treating fairly workers who refrain from union membership, then they should not claim exclusive representation over those workers,» said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. «It is unconscionable that IBEW union officials would stand in the way of independent-minded workers providing for their families – especially in this tough economy.»

Lugo also received free legal assistance from Foundation staff attorneys after IBEW union bosses illegally forced workers to annually renew their objections to paying full union dues. Such schemes, designed to force workers into full-dues-paying union membership, are a clear violation of federal law. The NLRB determined the IBEW union’s annual requirement was unlawful last year.

Noblesville, IN (July 16, 2012) – Robert Symonds, a local trucker, has just become one of the first Indiana citizens to exercise his right to stop paying union dues under the new Indiana Right to Work law. Symonds received free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys while he was attempting to cut off further dues payments.

On May 17, 2012, the contract between Teamsters Local 135 and Symonds’ employer, Indianapolis Haulage, expired and a new contract was agreed to. Under Indiana’s Right to Work law, contracts entered into after the law went into effect on March 15, 2012 must respect employees’ rights to refrain from the payment of any union dues. Despite the fact that Symonds resigned his union membership and revoked his dues check-off, Teamster officials told him he wouldn’t be able to stop paying dues until November 2012.

Upon the advice of a Right to Work Foundation attorney, Symonds responded to this obstructionist tactic by sending a letter to his employer, requesting it comply with Indiana law and immediately stop deducting dues from his paychecks. On June 29, Teamster officials sent Symonds a letter indicating they would back down and honor his request to immediately stop deducting union dues.

Symonds’ experience reflects an opportunity thousands of Indiana workers will have in the coming months. Under Indiana’s Right to Work law, forced-dues contracts between unions and employers entered into prior to the legislation’s effective date are still in place throughout the state. As these contracts expire, Indiana workers who were forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment will now have the option to refrain from paying any dues at all.

“We’re happy to report that Robert Symonds has successfully stopped paying dues to a union he no longer belongs to,” said Patrick Semmens, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “You shouldn’t have to pay union dues to get or keep a job, which is why Indiana’s new Right to Work law is right for Hoosiers everywhere.”