Card Check Syndicate content

Alarming Trend: Politicians Force Employees Into Union Ranks, Workers Have No Say

Yesterday's Politico featured an article on Big Labor's agenda for 2009 (which the SEIU union just announced that alone it plans to spend $85 million to push for). As we already know, priority one is imposing the card check organizing mandate that leads to intimidation and harassment of workers who may not wish to affiliate with a union.

The whole article is worth reading, however one particular quote is instructive about the state of Big Labor and union organizing today:

“For American labor, 2009 will be a big year,” McEntee said. “We have a new administration. We have governors all across the country who are looking toward being able to organize more workers in red states that have become blue.”

Notice that McEntee, who is the top official at the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union, says that it will be politicians who unionize workers.

This is the dirty little secret: It's increasingly uncommon for employees to seek unionization on their own.  Instead, most "organizing" takes place because union officials target workers for unionization from the outside top down-style, often with Big Labor supported politicians playing a central role.

Two of the many examples of this are the Maine State workers being represented by Foundation attorneys in the Locke U.S. Supreme Court case and the home and health care workers in Illinois who were forced into union ranks by disgraced Illinois Governor Rob Blagojevich. In both those cases, the union was designated by Big Labor-friendly governors -- rather than selected by the workers.

Appellate Court Errs by Blocking an Examination into UAW Backroom Deal as a Form of Labor Bribery

National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason made the following statement after the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld union lawyers' motion to dismiss of the case challenging a corrupt quid-pro-quo organizing agreement reached by Freightliner and UAW union officials in North and South Carolina:

Regrettably, the court severely misread and misinterpreted the statute. "Things of value" as defined under numerous federal statutes have long been held by courts to include intangible or non-monetary benefits.

The Congressional intent of the statute was to prevent employers from inducing union officials to bargain away workers' interests. That is exactly what was done here. Freightliner gave the UAW union officials organizing assistance that the court concedes is a "benefit" to the union. This benefit included preferred access to the employees, pro-union captive audience meetings on paid company time to solicit union authorization cards, employer silence, and an agreement that only the UAW would be able to recruit new dues payers without a secret ballot election.

These are most certainly "things of value" no matter how that term is defined -- subjective value, objective value, monetary value, etc. In fact, unions spend millions of dollars on corporate campaigns to attack companies with the very goal of obtaining these valuable advantages.

In return, the UAW hierarchy agreed to pre-negotiated contract concessions, and even the cancelling of certain employee benefits at other facilities. All of this was done before the employees had shown any interest in having UAW union officials represent them.

At the motion to dismiss phase, the allegations of the complaint must be taken as true. Therefore, even under the appellate court's holding that an ascertainable monetary value is required under 302, the U.S. District Court's dismissal of the complaint should have been reversed and case remanded for fact finding as to monetary value, which can easily be established.

Apparently union officials think they are entitled to another exception in federal criminal rules and procedures.

The union-abused employees represented by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys are likely to ask for a rehearing en banc or petition to the U.S. Supreme Court to correct this miscarriage of justice.

The decision can be downloaded here. Background on the case can be found here.

Workers at JCIM Grand Rapids Plant Seek Ejection of UAW Union

In Michigan, Foundation staff attorneys are providing legal aid to Johnson Controls (JCIM) Grand Rapids employees who want the UAW union hierarchy removed as the monopoly bargaining agent. Meanwhile UAW union organizers are attempting to force their way into JCIM’s Holland plant:

Grand Rapids, MI (December 23, 2008) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Johnson Controls (JCIM) employee at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood has filed a decertification petition seeking an election to oust the United Auto Workers (UAW) union as the JCIM workers’ monopoly bargaining agent.

The development is another blow to the UAW union hierarchy which has taken a major public relations hit in recent months because of its role in driving the Big Three automakers to the brink of bankruptcy.

JCIM worker Dawn Lambert filed the decertification petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which should conduct a secret-ballot election to determine whether or not a majority of the workforce wants to retain the UAW union as their monopoly bargaining agent. Under federal labor law governing the private sector, once the NLRB grants union officials monopoly bargaining status, it is illegal for any present or future employees – whether they are members of the union or not – to negotiate with their employer for themselves unless they can prove that the union hierarchy does not retain majority support.

Because a clear majority of the employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have expressed their intent to remove the UAW, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have also sent a letter to JCIM management demanding that they cease further contract negotiations and also withdraw recognition of what is now a minority union. Under the law, recognizing and negotiating with a union that does not have majority support is an unfair labor practice.

Read the rest of the Foundation's press release here.

Obama's DOL Pick: Secret Ballot Process "Unquestioned And Above Reproach," But Only When It Protects HER

Today, President-elect Barack Obama named his pick for Labor Secretary, California Congresswoman Hilda Solis. Unsurprisingly, union bosses are rallying behind the pick.

Solis is a prominent supporter of the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (a.k.a. the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill), which would replace the secret ballot with intimidating "card check" campaigns in which union goons repeatedly harass workers at work and at home to sign union authorization cards. Once the union collects a simple majority of these public "votes," every worker in the bargaining unit loses the right to negotiate directly with the employer.

But in January 2007, Solis joined other members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to protest the lack of a secret ballot in the election for CHC officials. The San Diego Union-Tribune has a good summary of their complaint (emphasis added):

On Wednesday, Sanchez did not elaborate on the claim of election rules violation. However, in a letter to Baca earlier this month, she, her sister, Solis and Velazquez contended the vote did not follow procedure because secret ballot votes were not taken.

The letter requested a new vote, by secret ballot.

“While this request is not likely to change the results, and while it may seem like a mere formality, it is important that the integrity of the CHC be unquestioned and above reproach,” it said.

There you have it -- incoming Labor Secretary Hilda Solis is on the record favoring the secret ballot as "unquestioned and above reproach." But only when it protects her from intimidation.

For more on the selection of union-label Hilda Solis as Secretary of Labor, click here to read the statement issued by National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

Forced Unionism Injects Ugly Conflict into the Workplace

Ronald Trowbridge has an excellent op-ed in Saturday's Houston Chronicle about the corrosive effects on forced unionism in the workplace.

Some years ago, I crossed a faculty picket line at a large university — the only faculty member out of several hundred professors to cross. Every fiber in my body opposed the strike, and I was pathologically unable to not cross. The nightmare that followed was the most stressful experience in my life, save for the cancer and death of my wife.

What happened?

As for my professorial friends, Frank screamed to me down the pathway filled with students, "You a******!" Walter said he was going to take a picture of my crossing the line and show it to people, hoping that I would get hurt.

Donald said to me in the crowded faculty lunchroom, "There's Trowbridge. No, he's not a scab; he's an oozing, running sore." Laughter erupted. Sheila called me a "scab," with a scowling, mean face. She really meant it.

Jay, my telephone mate and one I had taken in as a guest at my summer cottage, was so red-faced with anger at me that he yelled, "That's it, Trowbridge, I am never again going to answer your telephone!"

All this over an illegal strike. But for forced unionism proponents, what's legal, or just, or fair is irrelevant. It's all about some mindless, don't-question-your-peers sense of "solidarity."

And as Trowbridge warns, the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (a.k.a. the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill) will further increase workplace hostility by pitting union partisans against their co-workers by eliminating the protection of the secret ballot and incentivizing intimidation against workers by union goons.

 

Top 10 Forced Unionism Power Grabs on Big Labor's Agenda

In this week's "Top 10 List" from Human Events, the staff of Human Events listed the "Top 10 Things On Big Labor's Agenda." The list is telling, as it describes Big Labor's outrageous plans to to grab more coercive power and erode employees' rights in the workplace. Of course, the so-called "Employee Free Choice Act", more accurately called the "Card Check" Forced Unionism Bill tops the list:

1. Employee Free Choice Act
In addition to the notorious “card-check” provision that strips union members of their right to a secret ballot, this bill also provides for increased penalties for employers who commit allegedly unfair labor practices...

Besides card check forced unionism, Big Labor is even toying with a relaunch of efforts to "Repeal...Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act [which] would take from states the right to enact Right to Work laws." Big Labor has wanted for decades to repeal this critical provision, and the most serious attempt to do so was in 1960s.

Not only is Big Labor trying to ultimately overturn laws in Right to Work states, but they "also seek the forced unionization of police, firefighters, and EMTs by federal fiat -- overturning the laws of more than two dozen states."

Other notable aspects of Human Events' "Top 10 List" includes Big Labor's nefarious plans of using the Federal government to force more employees into full dues paying compulsory unionism (see: #6, 7), concealing corruption (see: #8), and making it harder for employees to exercise their rights against the abuses of compulsory unionism (see: #9, 10).

Union Partisan: "When It Comes to Unions, We Should Be More Like China"

It's fascinating to examine the mindset of union partisans fighting to enact the misnamed Employee Free Choice Act (a.k.a Card Check Forced Unionism Act), which would virtually eliminate the secret ballot in workplace elections.

Jon Tasini, a union consultant and former union boss, supports Card Check Forced Unionism which would allow union goons to collect "votes" in public by repeatedly harassing workers at the job and at home.

But Tasini thinks the Card Check Forced Unionism does not go far enough. He'd rather just have absolute government-imposed forced unionism, like China, where the authoritarian regime simply tells companies "you have to have unions" -- and that's, that.

Read Tasini's entire post here.

Note that he doesn't even attempt to couch his support of the bill under the premise that card card is a better barometer of majority support than an election (which, of course, is absurd). In fact, there's no mention of majority support at all -- or even whether or not ANY of the workers at a company want to unionize.

New Right to Work Podcast: Obama Administration to Pack the NLRB

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the underlying law it enforces are major tools for union bosses to force workers into union collectives and force them to pay union dues. The incoming Obama administration is expected to help Big Labor use the NLRB even more aggressively in its war against employee free choice.

Today, Foundation VP Stefan Gleason is joined by former NLRB Member John Raudabaugh, who reveals some disturbing things American workers and businesses should expect from the Obama NLRB:


You can also listen to the Foundation's podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.

[Note: Some Firefox users have reported audio distortion when using the
player above. To ensure the podcast plays correctly just click here to listen.]

 

Practice What You Preach, You Hypocrite

Politico reports that House Dems are gearing up for a battle over the chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce Committee between Representatives Waxman and Dingell:

The race itself remains a tough one to call. “I’m not even sure the candidates know,” said Washington Rep. Jay Inslee, a Waxman supporter.

And most lawmakers dread picking sides.

Asked who she would be supporting, Rules Chairwoman Louise McIntosh Slaughter of New York exclaimed, “Oh, it’s a secret ballot, thank the Lord.”

But while Slaughter literally praises God for the fact that she can vote in private, she also is a cosponsor of an effort to strip workers of their access to a secret-ballot vote for unionization. Does she even notice the rank hypocrisy?

“Streamlining” Union Intimidation

Last week, blogger Clayton Cramer gave his take on why Big Labor bosses would want to wipe out secret ballot elections from the American workplace. His account includes some telling examples of union boss intimidation:

I am more inclined to suspect that a lot of people sign the union authorization cards because they are either strongly encouraged or even directly threatened to do so. Labor unions are fundamentally institutions of organized violence. A friend who has since passed on left me this account of working in a union shop in California during World War II (when the federal government leaned pretty heavily on employers to accept unions):

Our next problem was that after three months on the job, workers were required to join the paper workers union. Those who did not received disfiguring beatings after hours. Having seen what happened to another girl in same position as Wanda and I, we decided that rather than face the same treatment we would quit our jobs before the three months ended.

I remember being quite young and surprised that my father was home during the day. He explained that his union, the Boilermakers/Blacksmiths, had gone on strike. "Can't you go to work anyway?"

"Not if you want to live."

And unfortunately, this wasn't just his imagination. There's a fascinating decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. v. Enmons (1973), that held that the Hobbs Act that "makes it a federal crime to obstruct interstate commerce by robbery or extortion" did not apply to labor unions engaged in destroying power company transformers with rifles and explosives because such use of violence did not qualify as extortion.
Extortion means that you are getting something that you don't have a right to get--while higher wages obtained through such violence was a legitimate union bargaining tactic. The Court may have actually come to the right conclusion, based on the legal definition of extortion and the legislative intent of the Hobbs Act--but it does show you something of how labor unions get things done.

I had a friend in California who grew up in Michigan. His father was a UAW local official. He remembered vividly being in a coffee shop with his family one day. The guy in the next booth made some remark to a companion that was uncomplimentary to the union--and my friend's father instinctively swung his coffee mug around and shattered it on this guy's jaw.

There's a long and ugly, bloody, deadly history of corporations and labor unions fighting it out in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. There's plenty of evil that was done by both sides. But this is not the situation today--not even close. Labor violence today is almost entirely by labor unions. I can easily believe that the reason that the AFL-CIO wants to "streamline" the process is that they are intimidating workers into signing authorization cards--and don't dare risk a secret ballot.

Well said.

To learn more on how union organizers mislead workers into signing away their rights and to view an appalling example of an actual "authorization card" used by Teamster union organizers to deceive employees into compulsory unionism, click here: Spotlight on "Card Check" Deception.


Terms of Web Site Use

Copyright © 2008 National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation
 National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation, Inc.
8001 Braddock Road / Springfield, Virginia 22160
(703) 321-8510 | (800) 336-3600 / (703) 321-9613 fax - general (703) 321-9319 fax - legal department