Springfield, VA (July 25, 2011) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation announced today that Geoffrey MacLeay, formerly of Longwood, Florida, has joined its legal staff.
MacLeay is a member of the Florida state bar and a 2007 graduate of the Emory University School of Law.

“Geoffrey MacLeay brings a real commitment to defending employee rights against the ongoing threat of compulsory unionism,” said Ray LaJeunesse, vice president and legal director of the National Right to Work Foundation.

“Geoff is already helping to further develop the Foundation’s litigation program to counter organized labor’s well-funded attack on individual worker rights – from its coercive ‘card check’ organizing campaigns to the misuse of employees’ compulsory dues for politics.”

As the newest addition to the Right to Work legal team, MacLeay will help build on the Foundation’s record of litigation against compulsory unionism, which includes several precedent-setting cases decided by the United States Supreme Court. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys currently represent thousands of employees in nearly 200 active cases nationwide.

Before joining the Foundation, MacLeay worked for a public relations firm in Alexandria, Virginia, where he dealt with union issues, among others. Prior to that, he worked at the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, also in Alexandria.

After graduating from law school, MacLeay practiced law with a firm in Winter Park, Florida. He received a bachelor’s degree in history and political science from Tulane University in 2004.

Madison, WI (July 19, 2011) – With the help of attorneys from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, three Wisconsin civil servants have moved to intervene in a union lawsuit against Governor Scott Walker. The lawsuit, filed by lawyers from the AFL-CIO and Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) union, challenges a recently-enacted law that would free public employees from paying union dues just to get or keep their jobs.

Foundation and Institute attorneys filed the motion today in United States District Court for Kristi Lacroix, a Wisconsin teacher at the LakeView Technology Academy, Nathan Berish, a teacher at Waukesha West High School, and Ricardo Cruz, a trust fund specialist at the Wisconsin Department of Employee Trust Funds.

Although Lacroix, Berish, and Cruz are not union members, their workplaces are subject to union monopoly bargaining, which means all three employees have been forced to pay union dues and accept union “representation” to keep their jobs.

Prior to the enactment of Wisconsin Act 10, the law union officials are challenging in court, Wisconsin civil servants could be forced to pay union dues and accept union workplace bargaining as a condition of employment. The new law, signed by Governor Walker, would prevent public sector union officials from collecting any money from nonunion workers, restrict union monopoly bargaining to the issue of employee wages, and end the use of taxpayer funded payroll systems for the collection of union dues.

Lacroix, Berish, and Cruz state that union officials are infringing on their freedom of association by forcing them to associate with and contribute money to organizations they have no interest in joining. They believe that their intervention is necessary to give voice to like-minded public employees while the lawsuit is being decided.

If granted, the employees’ motion to intervene would make them full participants in the lawsuit. LaCroix has already filed an amicus curiae brief opposing union lawyers’ attempt to block the law from going into effect.

“Many independent-minded civil servants have no interest in associating with or paying dues to public sector unions, and they deserve to have their voices heard because their rights are at stake in this case,” said Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “We hope these civil servants will be allowed to participate in a lawsuit that has far-reaching implications for all Wisconsin public employees.”

Washington, DC (July 6, 2011) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a federal agency charged with administering private sector labor law, has ruled against a Teamsters workplace policy that discriminated against nonunion workers. Kirk Rammage, the victim of union officials’ discriminatory practices, received free assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation during his extended legal battle.

Although the NLRB previously decided the case in Rammage’s favor in 2009, that ruling was later nullified by the Supreme Court on the grounds that the Board lacked a three member quorum at the time of the decision.

Rammage, an Interstate Bakeries employee from Ponca City, Oklahoma, was involved in the consolidation of two separate corporate divisions in 2005. Part of one division was staffed by a single nonunion sales representative – Rammage – who had put in more time with Interstate Bakeries than any of his coworkers at the office where he worked. Although the company wanted to retain Rammage and protect his seniority during the merger, union bosses from Teamsters Local 523 demanded that union members receive preferential treatment, putting Rammage at the bottom of the seniority roster despite his workplace tenure.

At Interstate Bakeries, seniority increases employees’ chances of securing desirable sales routes and getting more time off. By insisting that Rammage lose his seniority, Teamster officials effectively signaled that union workers took priority over their nonunion colleagues.

After revisiting the facts of the case, the NLRB again concluded that Teamster officials broke the law by discriminating against employees based on their union representation status. However, the Obama Board’s new decision outlines a way for union officials to get around the National Labor Relations Act’s anti-discrimination provisions, indicating that union officials could have lawfully ignored Rammage’s tenure if they had claimed it was because he had no preexisting, enforceable seniority instead of saying it was because he wasn’t previously subject to union monopoly bargaining.

“Teamster bosses discriminated against a nonunion worker because he had the temerity not to associate with their union,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “While we’re pleased to report that the Board has finally gotten around to reaffirming Kirk Rammage’s rights, the Obama NLRB still managed to show its pro-compulsory unionism bias by taking the opportunity to provide union bosses with a roadmap for ‘legally’ discriminating against non-union employees in similar situations in the future.”

Seattle, Washington (July 5, 2011) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a federal agency responsible for administering private sector labor law, has found merit to charges filed by two Virginia Mason Medical Center nurses against the Washington State Nurses Association (WSNA) union. The charges, which were filed for the nurses by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, state that WSNA officials automatically enrolled nurses in the union without their consent and forced them to pay full union dues.

By finding merit to the charges, the National Labor Relations Board has signaled that WSNA officials must enter into a unit-wide settlement that protects nurses’ rights or face prosecution. The NLRB also agrees that a provision in the union’s contract limiting nurses’ right to resign is unlawful.

Therese Mollerus-Gale still works at Virginia Mason Medical Center while Maureen Lenahan has since resigned her position to accompany her husband to his next military posting. Because Washington lacks a Right to Work law, employees like Lenahan and Mollerus-Gale can be forced to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. However, the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent Communication Workers v. Beck holds that nonunion employees cannot be charged for union activities unrelated to workplace bargaining, such as members-only events and political activism.

Meanwhile, another nurse has stepped forward to file new unfair labor practice charges against the WSNA union. According to Amber Finn, who also works at Virginia Mason, WSNA officials ignored her letter requesting nonmember status, enrolled her as a union member without her consent, and threatened to have her fired for refusing to pay full dues.

WSNA officials also resorted to frivolous procedural tactics to prevent Finn from leaving the union, ignoring her resignation letter because she didn’t submit it via certified mail. Moreover, WSNA officials failed to provide nurses with an independently-audited breakdown of union expenditures, which is required by law to help nonunion employees determine what dues they have to pay as a condition of keeping their jobs.

The NLRB will now investigate Finn’s charges against the union.

“Hard-working nurses shouldn’t be pushed into union ranks and forced to pay tribute to WSNA bosses just to keep their jobs,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Nobody should have to pay union dues or join a union just to make a living, which is why Washington needs to make union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary by passing a Right to Work law immediately.”

Teamster Union Bosses Hit with Federal Charges for Having Coca-Cola Worker Illegally Fired

Incident shows Pennsylvania’s workers desperately need Right to Work protections

Houston, PA (July 5, 2011) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a former Coca-Cola employee has filed federal charges against a local Teamster union and the company for discrimination and illegally firing him from his job.

Keith Smiesko of Saxonburg filed the federal charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Pittsburgh on Thursday.

Earlier this year, Teamster Local 585 union officials ordered Smiesko – who had refrained from full union membership and dues payments – to immediately pay full union dues for the previous three years along with additional union initiation fees without ever notifying him that he was being charged for their so-called «representation.» Union officials illegally threatened Smiesko with job termination if he did not pay.

Smiesko refused, exercising his rights under the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent in Communication Workers v. Beck, which allows workers to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership. Teamster Local 585 union officials then demanded that Coca-Cola fire Smiesko and Coca-Cola complied with the union bosses’ command.

Read the entire release here.

Houston, PA (July 5, 2011) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a former Coca-Cola employee has filed federal charges against a local Teamster union and the company for discrimination and illegally firing him from his job.

Keith Smiesko of Saxonburg filed the federal charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional office in Pittsburgh on Thursday.

Earlier this year, Teamster Local 585 union officials ordered Smiesko – who had refrained from full union membership and dues payments – to immediately pay full union dues for the previous three years along with additional union initiation fees without ever notifying him that he was being charged for their so-called «representation.» Union officials illegally threatened Smiesko with job termination if he did not pay.

Smiesko refused, exercising his rights under the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent in Communication Workers v. Beck, which allows workers to refrain from full-dues-paying union membership. Teamster Local 585 union officials then demanded that Coca-Cola fire Smiesko and Coca-Cola complied with the union bosses’ command.

Smiesko also seeks to be reinstated immediately to his job with Coca-Cola while the case is pending.

«No worker should ever be extorted by union bosses to join or pay dues to a union in order to get or keep a job,» said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. «Pennsylvania desperately needs Right to Work protections for its workers to strip from predatory union bosses the power to compel workers to give up some of their hard-earned money they need to provide for their families.»

Despite the Court precedent in Beck, union bosses can still force workers who refrain from formal union membership into paying part of union dues because Pennsylvania does not have a Right to Work law. However they cannot compel workers to pay the portion of union dues used for the union’s political, lobbying, and member-only activities.

If enacted, a Right to Work law would end compulsory union dues by making union membership and dues payment strictly voluntary. Polls consistently show that 8 in 10 Americans support the Right to Work principle, that no worker should be compelled to join a union or pay union dues to get or keep a job. Twenty-two states have already passed Right to Work protections for their workers.

Teacher Files Brief in Wisconsin Government Unionism Reform Battle in Federal Court

Public-sector union bosses file desperate lawsuit seeking to protect forced dues stranglehold over Wisconsin’s public workers and taxpayers

Madison, WI (June 29, 2011) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation and the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a Kenosha teacher affected by Wisconsin’s recent public-sector unionism reforms has filed an amicus curiae brief in federal court.

Kristi Lacroix, who has been a teacher for 13 years and is an English teacher at the LakeView Technology Academy in Pleasant Prairie, filed the brief Monday in favor of the reforms which sharply limited government union officials’ monopoly bargaining power over public workers and taxpayers.

Earlier this month, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld Governor Scott Walker’s government-sector monopoly bargaining reform bill, which protects the Right to Work for most government employees and bans automatic forced-union-dues seizures from public employees’ paychecks.

In response, union lawyers filed a new lawsuit in federal court seeking to overturn the bill, claiming that Freedom of Association – the right of American citizens to voluntarily come together to express their opinions and petition the government – gives union bosses forced-dues and monopoly bargaining powers.

Foundation staff attorneys have won at the United States Supreme Court numerous times on this very issue, winning precedents that support the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s government-sector monopoly bargaining reform bill.

Read the entire release here.

Madison, WI (June 29, 2011) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation and the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a Kenosha teacher affected by Wisconsin’s recent public-sector unionism reforms has filed an amicus curiae brief in federal court.

Kristi Lacroix, who has been a teacher for 13 years and is an English teacher at the LakeView Technology Academy in Pleasant Prairie, filed the brief Monday in favor of the reforms which sharply limited government union officials’ monopoly bargaining power over public workers and taxpayers.

Earlier this month, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld Governor Scott Walker’s government-sector monopoly bargaining reform bill, which protects the Right to Work for most government employees and bans automatic forced-union-dues seizures from public employees’ paychecks.

In response, union lawyers filed a new lawsuit in federal court seeking to overturn the bill, claiming that Freedom of Association – the right of American citizens to voluntarily come together to express their opinions and petition the government – gives union bosses forced-dues and monopoly bargaining powers.

Foundation staff attorneys have won at the United States Supreme Court numerous times on this very issue, winning precedents that support the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s government-sector monopoly bargaining reform bill. For example, in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1976), Foundation attorneys successfully argued that compulsory union dues for union boss politics violate dissenting employees’ First Amendment rights.

More recently, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Davenport v. Washington Education Association (2007) that, because union bosses have no constitutional right to collect fees from nonmembers, a state may require union officials to obtain consent before spending nonmember government employees’ forced fees on political activities. The court upheld that precedent in Ysursa v. Pocatello Education Association (2009) when it ruled 6-3 that an Idaho law banning payroll deduction for union political dues from state and local government employees was indeed constitutional.

In their legal brief, union officials admitted that under the reforms public-sector union bosses would lose at least a quarter of their forced-union-dues revenues. For example, Wisconsin teacher union bosses would not be able to force independent-minded teachers to pay $5.4 million in forced dues and $375,000 toward teacher union boss political activism, thus highlighting the need for a Right to Work law for Wisconsin’s workers – in both the public and private sectors.

«Despite mounting budget deficits and a public that demands accountability, Big Labor operatives have made their position clear: No concessions, no compromise, and no surrender,» said Mark Mix, President of National Right to Work. «But union boss intransigence shouldn’t be allowed to derail the necessary reforms that free Wisconsin public-sector employees from being forced to pay union dues just to get or keep a job and strip union operatives of their ability to drive up the cost of government.»

«We intend to vigorously defend the Foundation-won Supreme Court precedents that guarantee government employees cannot be fired for refusing to subsidize union boss politics and to withstand Big Labor’s all-out assault to restore its forced-dues privileges over Wisconsin’s public workers.»

Bridgeport, CT (June 28, 2011) – With the help of National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, a local police officer has filed suit in United States District Court against two unions and the City of Bridgeport for illegally confiscating union dues from his paycheck.

Although the plaintiff, William Bailey, is not a union member, all Bridgeport police officers are subject to a bargaining agreement between the city and the Bridgeport Police Local 1159 and Council 15 AFSCME, AFL-CIO unions. After resigning his union membership in 2007, Bailey indicated that he wished to opt-out of dues unrelated to collective bargaining in 2011.

Because Connecticut has not passed a Right to Work law, state employees can be forced to pay part of union dues as a condition of employment. However, under the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision Teachers Local 1 v. Hudson, public employees must be notified how much of their dues are spent on union activities unrelated to collective bargaining – such as members-only events and political activism – and given the opportunity to opt out of paying for those activities.

Despite this precedent, the agreement between the City of Bridgeport and Local 1159 and Council 15 allows union officials to deduct a “service charge” from nonunion employees equal to the dues paid by full union members. Since January 2011, Bridgeport has seized and union operatives have collected the equivalent of full union dues from Bailey’s paycheck over his objections. Moreover, Bailey has not been given the opportunity to challenge the amount collected or review the union’s finances. Union officials have never responded to Bailey’s requests to opt out of paying full union dues in the first place.

Bailey’s complaint seeks the return of all unlawfully seized dues, plus interest, from the unions and an injunction to prevent union officials from collecting any dues from Bailey until Local 1159 and Council 15 adopt a payment procedure that safeguards his constitutionally-protected right to opt out.

“Public officials and union operatives colluded to extract full union dues from a nonunion police officer who has no interest in subsidizing the union’s agenda,” said Patrick Semmens, Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Foundation. “Until Connecticut safeguards public employees’ rights by making union membership and dues payments completely voluntary, this type of abuse will continue unchecked.”

Washington, DC (June 27, 2011) – The United States Supreme Court today agreed to review a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that effectively forces nonunion California state employees to fund union political activism. The Ninth Circuit decision came in a class action lawsuit filed by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys for eight California civil servants – including two former union members – against the California State Employee Association (CSEA) union.

Under the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision Teachers Local 1 v. Hudson, public employees forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment must be notified of how much of their dues are spent on union activities unrelated to collective bargaining – such as members-only events and political activism – and given an opportunity to opt out of paying for said activities. Despite this precedent, CSEA union officials issued a “special assessment” in 2005 to raise money from all state employees for a union political fund, regardless of their membership status. Nonunion employees were not given a chance to opt out.

In 2007, a federal district court ruled that the CSEA was required to provide a notice to nonunion employees about the assessment, allow them to opt-out of paying into the union political fund, provide a refund of monies spent on union boss politics, and pay interest from the dates of the deduction to nonmembers who chose to opt out. After CSEA union lawyers appealed the case, a Ninth Circuit panel reversed that decision in December 2010.

On March 10, 2011, Right to Work attorneys filed a petition for a writ of certiorari for the plaintiffs with the United States Supreme Court.

“We’re happy to report that the Supreme Court will review a decision that effectively forces nonunion state employees to subsidize objectionable union political activities,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Allowing the Ninth Circuit’s ruling to stand would further undermine state employees’ First Amendment rights and encourage union bosses to extract more forced dues from nonunion workers as a condition of employment.”