Springfield, Va. (April 15, 2005) – The following is a statement of Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, in response to the preliminary upholding of the United Auto Workers (UAW) union’s “neutrality agreement” with Dana Corporation by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

“The ALJ’s wrongheaded ruling will allow us swiftly to bring this case before an NLRB that has already indicated that it has a dim view of ‘card check’ agreements and the attendant violation of the principle of employee free choice.

“We are extremely confident our forthcoming appeal will succeed, because the ALJ’s decision ignores 40 years of established Board precedent. It is simply unlawful for UAW officials to bargain over the wages and working conditions of workers when a majority of workers have not selected the union.

“In the Dana agreement, the UAW hierarchy made explicit concessions as to workers’ wages and benefits in exchange for active company assistance in coercing employees to unionize. And then they kept the pact secret from the employees those concessions would hurt.

“This case presents a classic example of an employer choosing the union it wants to represent its employees, working with union officials to coerce employee support for it, and negotiating basic contract terms in advance.

“In their rush to establish the UAW as the monopoly representative of the employees at Dana in St. Johns, Michigan, UAW and Dana officials trampled upon fundamental employee rights guaranteed by federal labor law.”

Washington, DC (April 13, 2005) ¯ The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation’s president today filed a request with the Department of Labor (DOL) asking the agency to investigate and prosecute a top AFL-CIO official for violating a federal disclosure law intended to reveal potential conflicts of interest by union officials.

Foundation attorneys have discovered that the AFL-CIO’s Director of International Affairs, Barbara Shailor, has never filed the mandatory union disclosure forms on which she must disclose compensation received by her husband, Robert Borosage, from the «Campaign for America’s Future» (CAF), an organization which he founded and leads. She also must disclose that her husband’s organization has received at least $130,000 in payments from the AFL-CIO in recent years.

Aside from exposure to potential criminal prosecution, the apparent failure to follow federal disclosure law opens up Shailor, Borosage, and CAF to charges of hypocrisy in light of the national notoriety Borosage and CAF recently received in vehemently denouncing Representative Tom DeLay (R-TX) for alleged unethical behavior.

Under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA), union officers like Shailor must file annually an “LM-30” form to disclose potential conflicts of interest.

“The workers – whose dues collected in many cases as a condition of employment, pay Ms. Shailor’s salary and the AFL-CIO’s contributions to her husband’s organization – are entitled, by law, to know how their money is being spent and whether there has been any self-dealing by union officials,” said Mark Mix, president of the Foundation.

Responding to an extensive wave of union corruption, the U.S. Congress held extensive hearings in 1959, which resulted in passage of the LMRDA. Also known as the Landrum-Griffin Act, the LMRDA requires that among other things, unions, their officers, and key employees must annually disclose certain financial information.

Penalties for willful violation of the LMRDA include up to a $100,000 fine and up to one year in jail. Union officials may also be barred from holding office or even being a union employee for up to 13 years for violating the LMRDA.

Santa Monica, Calif. (April 1, 2005) – After National Right to Work Foundation attorneys persuaded National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) prosecutors to file a complaint against a local union and hotel for corralling the workers into unionization, the hotel has been forced to withdraw recognition of the union.

After six employees at the Four Points by Sheraton Hotel filed federal unfair labor practice charges in late 2003 to challenge a so-called “card check” unionization drive that resulted in a flood of allegations of workers’ rights violations, the NLRB General Counsel’s office ordered prosecution of the hotel and the union for collusion. The workers alleged that the hotel illegally recognized Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees (HERE) Union Local 11 as the monopoly bargaining representative of the Hotel’s staff despite a lack of majority support.

Under “card check” or so-called “neutrality agreements,” employers are induced to waive their employees’ ability to vote in a secret ballot election and agree to provide other assistance to union organizers in pressuring employees to unionize. These pacts often include unlawful pre-arrangements over substantive terms and conditions of employment, such as health care, wages, or compulsory union dues. Typically the union will agree to limit wage and benefit demands in exchange for company help in coercing workers to unionize.

Because many Four Points workers felt harassed into signing union authorization cards, and many revoked signed cards, the employees disputed the union’s claim that a majority of the workers actually support it – and NLRB officials agreed. The employees asked the NLRB to bar HERE officials from bargaining on their behalf. Rather than face a trial, the hotel and union settled.

In withdrawing recognition of the HERE union, hotel officials also agreed not to recognize the union in future organizing attempts unless it demonstrates majority support through the less abusive government-supervised secret ballot election process. Hotel workers will also now be free to bargain directly with their employer over their own wages and working conditions.

“Despite HERE union officials’ claims of innocence, their decision to settle suggests that union officials recognize that they may not enjoy the support of a majority of workers,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “While this is a meaningful victory for these workers, so long as California workers labor under a system of compulsory unionism, they will continue to face such cynical schemes.”

San Diego, Calif. (March 31, 2005) — A U.S. District Court Judge has ruled that San Diego government union officials violated the First Amendment rights of non-union employees by implementing a discriminatory dental insurance package in June 2002 and 2003.

The dental benefits scheme, part of an agreement between the San Diego Municipal Employees Association (MEA) union and the City of San Diego, was designed to pressure employees into signing up as formal union members, thereby causing them to give up certain rights, including the ability to refrain from funding union political activities.

The case originated in August 2002, when San Diego employees Susan Brannian, David Cornacchia, and Jennifer Shen, with free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California challenging the legality of the discriminatory policy.

Under the June 2002 “open enrollment” scheme, non-union workers were completely barred from using their pre-tax dollars to enroll in the dental benefits plan, forcing them to either pay dues to union officials or forgo the option of enrolling in the plan.

Union and City officials later modified their agreement for the June 2003 enrollment period, this time forcing employees to pay a “voluntary” agency fee to receive the benefits, even though the union was required to provide all employees – regardless of union membership or agency fee payer status – with health insurance, life insurance, and the same lump sum allotment of pre-tax funds. In 2004, MEA union and City officials, under pressure from the workers’ suit, retreated from their coercive policy to allow non-union members to opt into the benefits plan.

“Rather than look after employees’ interests, MEA union officials shamelessly withheld workers’ benefits to force them into union ranks,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Without this type of coercion, union officials know that many employees have little use for the union and would therefore resign and withhold financial support.”

The Court agreed with Foundation attorneys’ arguments and ruled that the 2002 members-only enrollment scheme “constitutes unlawful coercion to join the union in violation of the First Amendment.” For the 2003 enrollment period, the court found the agency fee option forced workers, “to subsidize the costs of union activities that he or she would have otherwise received for free. This amounts to more than coercing union membership; it constitutes coercion to subsidize the union itself,” the Court added.

Anchorage, Alaska (March 31, 2005) – Workers have once again voted to remove Teamsters Union Local 959 as the “exclusive bargaining representative” of more than 200 Anchorage-area school bus drivers and attendants. Employees voted 109-78 this week to vote out the unwanted union.

The new election result comes on the heels of a December 2004 election in which workers voted to decertify the union 105-83. This week’s election was held after union officials filed objections to the results of the December 2004 vote. The drivers’ employer, First Student, Inc., provides school bus services to the Anchorage School District.

With free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, school bus driver Jayne Larrassey filed objections to a May 2004 decertification election in which the Teamsters union narrowly maintained its status as the workers’ monopoly representative after company officials stifled worker free speech. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 19 office ordered a new election in July 2004, but union officials appealed the decision to the full NLRB in Washington, delaying the new election. However, a three-member panel of the NLRB ordered in November that results from the tainted May union decertification election be set aside and that a new election be held because of the actions of company officials.

The federal labor agency’s order affirmed the findings in a report issued by a hearing officer of the NLRB’s Region 19 office. That report found “serious and extensive” company interference by enforcing an “overly broad rule” limiting employees’ rights to distribute pro-decertification literature leading up to the election.

The objections originated when Larrassey exercised her right to oppose the union hierarchy by distributing flyers in the company parking lot promoting the May 2004 decertification of the Teamsters union as the drivers’ monopoly bargaining agent. However, union activists quickly seized the flyers from the vehicles and turned them over to the union steward, who then reported Larrassey to company officials.

Larrassey was then given a “verbal warning” by a company official and told that any further attempt to circulate pro-decertification literature would result in disciplinary action. Larrassey was reprimanded a second time on the day of the election when she simply stood in a non-work area and reminded people to vote.

“Despite the best efforts of Teamsters officials to stifle dissent, First Student bus drivers will now determine their own future in an atmosphere free from coercion,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation.

As a result of the decertification victory, First Student employees will now be free to negotiate their own terms and conditions of employment, and be rewarded on their individual merit.

Everett, WA (March 31, 2005) – Six local hospital workers filed class-action federal unfair labor practice charges this week against the Service Employees International Union District 1199 NW (SEIU). The charges state that SEIU officials failed to inform over 800 employees of Northwest Hospital and Medical Center of their rights to withhold payment of union dues for politics.

The six coworkers, with help from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, filed the charges at the NLRB’s regional office in Seattle.

“Union officials want these workers to simply shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Rather than respect the rights of workers they claim to represent, union officials are bullying workers into bankrolling union politics.”

The SEIU’s contract with the hospital expired in fall 2004, after which the union ceased collection of involuntary union dues from employees. Since then, the union has used the threat of “back-dues collection” to keep workers in line and preserve the union’s status as monopoly representative.

The actions of SEIU officials violate the rights of these six hospital employees recognized under the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision, Communications Workers v. Beck. Under Beck and subsequent NLRB rulings, union officials must inform employees of their right to refrain from formal union membership and the right not to be forced to pay for costs unrelated to collective bargaining.

Foundation attorneys argue that since SEIU officials failed to properly inform workers of these rights as required by law, they have no claim to any of the compulsory “back-dues” that they are currently using to threaten workers. The NLRB will now investigate the charge and decide whether to issue a formal complaint in the case.

“The attempts by union officials to run roughshod over workers’ rights show the inevitable greed and corruption that flow from forced unionism,” said Gleason.

Jacksonville, FL (March 30, 2005) – National Right to Work Foundation attorneys today announced they are withdrawing charges in a case brought by local United Parcel Service (UPS) workers against Teamsters Union Local 385, after union officials belatedly refunded dues money unlawfully seized from workers’ paychecks.

Upon receiving the reimbursement checks worth more than $2,500 combined, and written notice that union officials had finally accepted their resignations as required by law, the two workers withdrew their charge against the Teamsters union local.

Johnny Bass and Kenneth Johnson obtained free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys and filed the charges in November of 2004 with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after union officials repeatedly refused to accept employees’ resignations from the union and continued to deduct full union dues from their paychecks.

The employees alleged that the Teamsters union’s practices were part of a pattern of discrimination against similarly situated employees who wish to exercise their rights to refrain from union membership.

“Union officials want workers like these simply to shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “For the Teamsters officials, it’s all about the money – regardless of whether workers want anything to do with the union.”

The actions of Teamsters officials’ actions violated employee rights explicitly recognized under the U.S. Supreme Court Pattern Makers v. NLRB decision. Under Pattern Makers and subsequent NLRB rulings, union officials are obligated to honor immediately the resignations of employees from union membership at any time.

Additionally, Teamsters officials’ actions violated the spirit of Florida’s highly-popular Right to Work law, on the books since 1968, which prevents workers from having to join or pay dues to an unwanted union.

“Unfortunately, even in states like Florida where Right to Work protections exist, workers continue to face the heavy-handed tactics of union officials,” said Gleason.

LOS ANGELES, Calif. (March 30, 2005) — More than 97,000 Los Angeles County home care providers will receive checks in the mail this week as part of a civil rights lawsuit settlement that requires union officials to rebate an estimated $7.5-8 million in illegally seized compulsory union dues.

The rebates are the result of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 434B officials’ illegal forcing of home care providers to pay for politics and other activities unrelated to collective bargaining, as well as seizing fees in excess of the negotiated amount.

Represented by National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys, the providers began the settlement process in December 2002. The settlement was originally thought to involve only 60,000 rather than over 97,000 individuals. The rebates, originally estimated at $5 million, are now expected to be as much as $8 million.

“This settlement is an incremental yet important step towards holding union officials in California accountable for how they collect and spend workers’ compulsory union dues,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “However, the ultimate solution to this sort of abuse is to end union officials’ government-granted privileges to force employees to pay union dues or be fired from their jobs.”

In December 2001, Carla West and three other home care providers filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against SEIU Local 434B, the Personal Assistance Services Council (PASC) of Los Angeles County, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, and others.

In settling valid constitutional claims, SEIU officials agreed to return forced union dues illegally seized from workers who were not formal union members.

During the period for which rebates are being paid, SEIU union officials failed to follow the Foundation-won Supreme Court decision in Chicago Teachers v. Hudson. That decision requires unions to provide objecting employees an audited disclosure and advance reduction of forced union dues used for politics and other non-bargaining activities. After months of stonewalling, the SEIU produced an audit showing that a mere 48 percent of union dues are spent for collective bargaining. Objecting nonmember home care providers now pay half of what full union members pay in dues.

In 1999, Local 434B officials gained recognition by PASC as the exclusive bargaining agents of home care workers who provide non-medical in-home support services to disabled and elderly clients. Although they are reimbursed through the state, the workers are independently hired, fired, and supervised by individual recipients of home care. The constitutionally suspect agreement brokered between union operatives and government bureaucrats declares that home care providers are “public employees” for collective bargaining purposes only, even though the PASC “employer” has no authority over hiring, firing, work schedules, workplace safety, disputes with the employer-recipient, and the amount the state pays the workers.

Bridgeport, Connecticut (March 29, 2005) — A U.S. District Court Justice has approved a settlement of a case brought by six Bridgeport firefighters in a federal class-action lawsuit against the City of Bridgeport, a union, and top city officials for violations of their First Amendment rights by seizing compulsory union dues from the paychecks of scores of nonunion firefighters.

After receiving free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, the firefighters’ won a settlement forcing International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) union Local 834 officials to return $45,000 in union dues unlawfully seized between June 2002 and October 2004.

Union officials acted in concert with the City of Bridgeport and seized compulsory union dues from the firefighters who are not formal union members without first providing an adequate independent audit of the union’s expenditures, as required by law. The suit also named Bridgeport Mayor John Michael Fabrizi, among other top city officials, for the unconstitutional acts.

“IAFF union officials simply want nonunion firefighters to shut up and pay up,” said Stefan Gleason, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Union operatives should not be allowed trample on firefighters’ constitutional rights by unlawfully seizing dues from their paychecks.”

The firefighters filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut in June 2004. They alleged that IAFF Local 834 union officials seized the forced union dues without first providing the financial disclosure and procedures required by a long-standing U.S. Supreme Court ruling interpreting that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution protect public employees from demands to pay for union political activity and other activities they may oppose.

As a result of the case’s class-action status, the settlement provides restitution for all firefighters in the bargaining unit who are not formal members of IAFF Local 834 in the amount of forced dues collected prior to October 2004. At the same time, the settlement forces IAFF officials to cease deducting dues from those who not members until such time as the city and union comply with all of the constitutional requirements to collect dues.

Under the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court decision Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, before collecting any forced dues, union officials must first provide an audited disclosure of the union’s expenses. Such audits are intended to ensure that forced union dues seized from nonunion public employees do not fund union activities unrelated to collective bargaining.

High Point, North Carolina (March 15, 2005) – Responding to threats against an employee who led a successful legal challenge to the United Auto Workers (UAW) union’s forced unionization of the Thomas Built Bus facility, the National Right to Work Foundation today commissioned a 24-hour security detail at the employee’s home.

Meanwhile, the Foundation called upon two local district attorneys and police chiefs to open an investigation into the UAW union’s possible role in encouraging reprisals against workers opposing unionization.

The Foundation hired the security firm, Corporate Security International, Inc. which is staffed by former United States Army Delta Force counter-terrorism experts, after menacing flyers were circulated throughout the plant containing Jeff Ward’s phone number and detailed driving directions to his personal residence. A call to arms on the flyer reads “Jeff Ward lives here. Go tell him how you really feel about the union.”

The threat came as Ward successfully settled federal labor charges filed on behalf of his coworkers against the UAW union, Thomas Built, and Freightliner who federal labor prosecutors found had struck a sweetheart deal resulting in the unlawful coercing of employees into union ranks.

In a letter dated today, Foundation staff attorney Bill Messenger called upon the district attorneys for Guilford and Davidson counties, as well as the Thomasville and High Point police chiefs to investigate the harassment in order to protect Ward and his family, who have already begun to receive harassing phone calls late at night.

Referencing the flyer, Messenger urged, “This map constitutes a threat. It is an inducement for individuals to harass or do violence to Mr. Ward’s person, family, and/or property, based on his legal cause of action against the UAW. I urge that a thorough investigation be conducted as to the origin of this unlawful threat, and that the perpetrators of this action be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

“Given the documented role of UAW militants in union violence, it’d be unwise to take chances when it comes to the safety of Jeff Ward, his wife, and his children,” said Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason. “Union violence is a harsh reality, and Mr. Ward and his family should not have to live in fear simply because he came forward to assert his rights and the rights of his fellow employees.”

Facing prosecution by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), UAW union and Freightliner officials were forced to agree last week to cancel outright a company-wide sweetheart deal in which union officials had unlawfully bargained to cap workers’ wages and made other major concessions in exchange for Freightliner’s active assistance in coercing workers to unionize.

Based on evidence provided by Foundation attorneys, the NLRB’s General Counsel found that Freightliner officials at Thomas Built provided unlawful assistance to the union and held unlawful “captive audience” speeches jointly with union officials to coerce employees to sign union authorization cards that were treated as “votes” in favor of unionization.

Read the Foundation’s Letter to the High Point District Attorney