march-april 2013 issue of foundation action

FoundationActionFoundationAction

3

4

5

7

IN THIS ISSUE

Vol. XXXIII, No. 2 8001 Braddock Road • Springfield, Virginia 22160 www.nrtw.org March/April 2013

The bi-monthly newsletter of the National Right to Work

Legal Defense Foundation, Inc.

Foundation’s Brief Puts Illegitimate NLRB Appointees on the Spot

Order sought would force NLRB to cease and desist as long as illegal “recess” appointees remain

WASHINGTON, DC - In late January2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for theDistrict of Columbia struck downPresident Obama’s controversial “recess”appointments to the National LaborRelations Board (NLRB). Obama madethose “recess” appointments on January4, 2012, despite the fact that the U.S.Senate was not in recess.

Upon the court’s announcementstriking down Obama’s “recess” appoint-ments, NLRB Chairman Mark Pearceissued a statement that the rogue Boardwas going to continue to operate as nor-mal despite the appeals court decision.

In response, Foundation staff attor-neys filed a petition for a writ of man-damus (or prohibition) with the U.S.Court of Appeals for the District ofColumbia Circuit asking the court toorder the NLRB to suspend furtheraction in a union political lobbying casein which the Board defied Foundation-won Supreme Court precedent andgranted union bosses the power tocharge nonmember workers for unionpolitical lobbying activities.A mere 12 days after the petition was

filed, the court ordered the NLRB torespond and justify its continuing oper-ation.

“For the first time, the NLRB mustjustify why it is continuing to operatedespite the court’s finding that PresidentObama’s ‘recess’ appointments are con-stitutionally invalid,” said RayLaJeunesse, Foundation Legal Director.

“And if the court shuts down the NLRBin this case, it will open the door forchallenges in the other cases ruled on byObama’s so-called ‘recess’ appoint-ments.”

Worker protections at risk

As a result of the appeals court’s rul-ing, since at least January 3, 2012, theBoard has lacked a quorum as requiredby a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court precedent– thus invalidating the Board’s morethan 800 rulings and orders since thattime.

One of those cases involves JeanetteGeary, a former Warwick, Rhode Islandnurse at Kent Hospital, who filed feder-al charges against a local nursing unionwith the National Labor Relations Board(NLRB) in September 2009. The United

Union Officials Hit withLawsuit for Violating Utah’sRight to Work Law

BUSTED: Union BossesCaught Diverting CharitableDonations to Union Coffers

Teacher Wins Settlement afterUnion Violated HerConstitutional Rights

See NLRB FORCED TO RESPOND page 2

Nurses and Allied Professionals(UNAP) union hierarchy was illegallyforcing Geary and some of her cowork-

High Noon: The US Supreme Court now has an opportunity to reign in theout-of-control Obama National Labor Relations Board.

Foundation Legal DirectorWarns Congress of NLRB’sBig Labor Bias

2 Foundation Action March/April 2013

Rev. Fred Fowler Chairman, Board of TrusteesPatrick Semmens Vice President and Editor-in-ChiefRay LaJeunesse, Jr. Vice President and Legal DirectorMark Mix President

The Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by abuses of compulsory unionism. All contributions

to the Foundation are tax deductible under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Distributed by theNational Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc.

8001 Braddock Road, Springfield, Virginia 22160www.nrtw.org • 1-800-336-3600

Foundation Action

ers, all nonmembers, into paying for theunion bosses’ lobbying, including lobby-ing for legislation in neighboringVermont.

The U.S. Supreme Court has longheld that nonmember workers cannotbe compelled to pay for union boss pol-itics. The U.S. Supreme Court held inthe National Right to Work Foundation-won Communications Workers v. Beckcase that nonmember workers cannotbe forced to pay for union activitiesunrelated to workplace bargaining, suchas members-only events and unionpolitical lobbying.

However, in December 2012, theinvalid NLRB expanded union bosses’powers to charge nonmember workersfor union lobbying by a vote of three toone – flying in the face of long-standingSupreme Court precedent. The Boardthen retained jurisdiction over the casepending further briefing on applyingthe ruling, forcing Foundation staffattorneys to file the petition that spurredthe appeals court to demand an answer

from the NLRB on the “recess” appoint-ments issue.

Meanwhile, various federal appealscourts across the country are hearingsimilar challenges to the NLRB recessappointments. Foundation staff attor-neys brought the issue before the U.S.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuitin Chicago and have another challengepending in the U.S. Court of Appeals forthe District of Columbia Circuit.

Moreover, challenges from other organ-izations are pending before the U.S.Court of Appeals for both the Third andFourth Circuits.

NLRB appeals loss to U.S.Supreme Court

The three judge panel on the appealscourt that struck down PresidentObama’s “recess” appointments ruledthat Obama violated Article II of theU.S. Constitution, which requires thePresident to obtain the advice and con-sent of the U.S. Senate for appointmentsto the most powerful positions in theexecutive branch, and Article 1, Section5, Clause 4 of the Constitution, whichclearly states that Congress decideswhen there is a recess.

The appeals court adopted argumentsmade in an amicus curiae (“friend of thecourt”) brief filed by National Right toWork Foundation staff attorneys forfour workers who are receiving free legalassistance from the Foundation in casespending before the Board.

After conferring with PresidentObama’s Department of Justice, theNLRB announced in mid-March that itwill appeal the appeals court’s decisionstriking down Obama’s “recess” appoint-ments to the U.S. Supreme Court. TheNLRB’s appeal sets up a no-holds-barred fight over Obama’s “recess”appointments before the High Court.

“We hope the Supreme Court willtake this opportunity to rein in the out-of-control NLRB and restore the balanceof power the constitution intended,”stated Mark Mix, President of NationalRight to Work. “A favorable rulingcould shut down the NLRB for the restof Obama’s presidency, or at least floodit with a backlog of old cases the Boardwill have to reconsider, thus slowing itsonslaught against workers’ rights.”

NLRB Forced to Respond to Foundation’s Legal Challengecontinued from page 1

“We’re happy to report that Mrs.Stavrakoglou has received a favorable rul-ing and will finally have her religiousbeliefs respected,” continued Semmens.“However, teachers shouldn’t have to jumpthrough a series of bureaucratic and legalhoops to stop paying dues to an organiza-tion they’d rather not join or support.They also shouldn’t have to trust unac-countable union officials not to mispend achunk of their hard-earned paychecks.Instead, New York should enact a Right toWork law, which would make union mem-bership and dues payments strictly volun-tary and end this type of abuse once andfor all.”

NEW YORK, NY - With the help ofNational Right to Work Foundationstaff attorneys, a Long Island teacher haswon a favorable ruling against twounions at the New York State SupremeCourt. Maureen Stavrakoglou originallyfiled suit against the two unions forrefusing to tell her what they did withunion dues that were supposed to havebeen redirected to charities.

Stavrakoglou is employed by theBrentwood School District, whichrequires all teachers to pay dues to theBrentwood Teachers Association (BTA)union and its state affiliate, the NewYork State United Teachers (NYSUT)union, as a condition of employment.Because New York lacks a Right to Worklaw, nonunion employees throughoutthe state can be forced to pay union duesto get or keep a job. However, teacherswith sincere religious objections to sup-porting a union are entitled to requestthat their union dues be redirected to amutually agreed upon charity.

After Stavrakoglou made known herobjections to the NYSUT union’s ideo-logical activities, the BTA and NYSUTunions entered into an agreement in2005 that was to have all of her NYSUTdues redirected to charity. Stavrakoglouthen asked union officials to redirect herdues for 2007-2008 to the Make a WishFoundation. The BTA’s presidentassured Stavrakoglou that the dueswould be sent to the charity she desig-nated.

Unscrupulous union officials kept dues earmarked for charity

After coming to an agreement withthe unions, Stavrakoglou subsequentlydesignated a new charity each year asthe recipient of her union dues.

March/April 2013 Foundation Action 3

However, two of the charities shechose – The Cystic FibrosisFoundation and the Now I Lay MeDown to Sleep Foundation – have norecord of ever receiving a donationfrom the union under Stavrakoglou’sname. A third charity, The NYCFirefighters’ Burn Foundation, onlyreceived Stavrakoglou’s donation aftershe called union officials to inquireabout the status of her dues. Thedonation was made over half a yearafter it was supposed to have beendone.

“Maureen Stavrakoglou took unionofficials at their word, and they repaidthat trust by deceiving her aboutwhere her union dues were going,”said Patrick Semmens, Vice Presidentof the National Right to WorkFoundation. “Their outrageousactions prevented Stavrakoglou fromcontributing her dues to several wor-thy charities.”

Teacher wins ruling thatsafeguards her beliefs

Last August, Stavrakoglou filed alawsuit seeking an account of how herunion dues were spent and the imme-diate payment of any illegally-confis-cated dues to the charities she desig-nated. Although they admitted to fail-ing to donate Stavrakoglou’s dues toseveral of the designated charities,union lawyers filed a motion to dis-miss, promising that the unions wouldno longer keep any dues earmarkedfor charitable donations.

Fortunately for Stavrakoglou, theNew York Supreme Court ruled thatthe union must provide evidence thather dues were sent to charitableorganizations, and ordered the unionto hold Stavrakoglou’s dues in escrowuntil such proof is established.

After unscrupulous union officialskept dues she had earmarked forcharities, Maureen Stavrakoglouturned to the National Right to WorkFoundation for help.

BUSTED: Union Bosses Caught Diverting Charitable Donations to Union Coffers

Union scheme may have stiffed several charities, including The NYC Firefighters’ Burn Foundation

For breaking news and

other updates, check out the

Foundation’s website:

www.nrtw.org


SALT LAKE CITY, UT - In Utah, fourrailroad car repairmen have filed a law-suit contending that their employer anda local union violated their rights underUtah’s popular Right to Work law andillegally coerced them into paying thou-sands of dollars in union dues.

With free legal assistance fromNational Right to Work Foundationstaff attorneys, the four workers – BryanRees, James Rogers, Richard Simone,and Jason Wilson – sued Progress Rail, awholly owned subsidiary of CaterpillarInc., and the Brotherhood of RailwayCarmen/International Association ofMachinists (IAM) Local 6601 union inthe Third Judicial District Court in SaltLake County.

Union boss contract violates Utah’s Right to Work law

Utah’s popular Right to Work law,enacted in 1955, gives workers theunconditional right to refrain fromunion membership and dues payments.Despite the Right to Work law, IAMLocal 6601 union brass negotiated acontract with Progress Rail in May 2006that contained an illegal forced duesclause that requires all covered employ-ees, including nonmembers, to payunion dues or fees as a condition ofemployment.

All four workers allege in the suit thatwhen they started working at ProgressRail at various dates between December2005 and August 2011, union officialsinformed them that union membershipand full dues payments were a conditionof their employment.

And as a result, union officials confis-cated up to $12,000 in illegal union duespayments from the workers’ paychecksuntil October 2012, about two monthsafter the workers found out about their

Union Officials Hit with Lawsuit for Violating Utah’s Right to Work LawWorkers sue company and union for illegally seizing nearly twelve thousand dollars in union dues

rights under Utah’s Right to Work law.The four workers are asking the court

to bar the company and the union fromenforcing the illegal forced dues clausein the contract and to order a refund ofthe illegally-seized union dues.

Case highlights nationalimportance of Right toWork laws

“For years, IAM Local 6601 unionbosses kept workers in the dark abouttheir rights and took thousands of dol-lars of their hard-earned money in vio-lation of Utah’s popular Right to Worklaw,” Mark Mix, President of theNational Right to Work Foundation,told the Salt Lake Tribune. “The union’scareless disregard for these workers’rights underscores the need for morestates to pass Right to Work protectionsfor their workers.”

Twenty-four states currently haveRight to Work protections for employ-ees. According to public polling, nearly80 percent of Americans - and 80 per-cent of union members - support the

Four Utah-based railroad car repairmen sued to derail a forced-dues schemethat undermines Utah’s popular Right to Work law.

Right to Work principle of voluntaryunionism.

Moreover, Right to Work states con-sistently enjoy better economic per-formance than their forced unionismneighbors. Over the past decade, datacollected by the Bureau of EconomicAnalysis reveal that Right to Work statesoutperform forced unionism states interms of private sector job creation.

Not only are more jobs created inRight to Work states, but employees’paychecks also go farther. A recent studyfrom University of Colorado economistBarry Poulson found that households inRight to Work states have nearly $4,300more in purchasing power than familiesin forced unionism states.

“Not only do Right to Work lawsboost economic growth and create jobs,they also strike at the very heart of BigLabor’s government-granted power tocompel workers to pay dues just to getor keep a job,” said Mix. “And the law-suit in Utah goes to show just howimportant Right to Work protections arefor workers who want nothing to dowith forced-dues hungry union offi-cials.”

son about just how important Act 10 isin protecting Wisconsin public employ-ees from forced unionism abuses.”

Wisconsin union bosses are stillattacking Act 10 in various state andfederal courts, but largely to no avail.

In December, the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the Seventh Circuit based inChicago adopted arguments made byNational Right to Work Foundationstaff attorneys and upheld Act 10 as con-stitutional. Meanwhile, Wisconsin civilservants continue to defend Act 10 inother cases pending before state andfederal courts with free legal assistancefrom Foundation staff attorneys, includ-ing a case pending before the WisconsinCourt of Appeals.

“Union bosses can’t tolerate anyrestrictions on their power over work-ers,” stated Mix. “And your NationalRight to Work Foundation continues toassist Wisconsin civil servants who aretaking a stand against compulsoryunionism in their workplaces.”


Teacher Wins Settlement after Union Violated Her Constitutional Rights Case demonstrates why Wisconsin reforms were needed to protect state workers

Foundation staff attorneys helpedAmy Anaya, a Wisconsin teacher,reclaim her forced dues after unionofficials violated her rights.

GREENWOOD, WI - A formerGreenwood, Wisconsin, teacher haswon a settlement from a local teacherunion and the school district for refus-ing to honor her constitutional rightsand for failing to follow federal disclo-sure requirements.

Spanish teacher Amy Anaya taught inthe School District of Greenwood for ayear. When Anaya was first hired by thedistrict in August 2011, GreenwoodEducation Association (GEA) unionofficials illegally told her that she “hadto” sign the union’s membership form.When GEA union officials demandedAnaya join the union, she told them thatshe had no desire to become a unionmember.

Anaya told Foundation Action thather initial reason for not wanting to jointhe union was its support of causes sheopposed. “[The union] also defendedteachers that should have been moreconcerned about improving themselvesthan moving up the pay scale and get-ting more benefits,” said Anaya.

Beginning on September 9, 2011,union officials began collecting fullunion dues, or $31.35, from each ofAnaya’s paychecks anyway. InDecember 2011, GEA union officialsagain demanded that Anaya join theunion, and she again informed themthat she was not interested in joining.

Union officials ignore worker protections

The U.S. Supreme Court has long rec-ognized that a public sector worker hasa First Amendment right to refrain fromformal union membership at any time.Moreover, the U.S. Supreme Court ruledin the Foundation’s Chicago TeachersUnion v. Hudson case that union offi-cials who collect union fees as a condi-tion of employment must first provide

nonmember public sector workers withan independently-audited financialbreakdown of all forced-dues unionexpenditures and the opportunity toobject and challenge the amount offorced union fees before an impartialdecisionmaker.

And with passage of WisconsinGovernor Scott Walker’s Act 10 publicsector unionism reform in 2011, whichcontains a provision that gives mostWisconsin civil servants Right to Workprotections, no Wisconsin teacher canbe forced to pay any union dues or feesas a condition of employment.

Union officials failed to provideAnaya with her U.S. Supreme Court-mandated constitutional protectionsand the school district deducted fullunion dues from her paychecks for theentire school year. Moreover, the unionbrass negotiated a contract with theschool district in an attempt to skirt Act10’s provisions giving Greenwood teach-ers the Right to Work.

Complaint forces union officials to issue refund

With free legal assistance fromNational Right to Work Foundation staffattorneys, Anaya filed complaintsagainst the school district and the unionwith the Wisconsin EmploymentRelations Commission in September2012. Union lawyers then agreed to asettlement with Anaya under which theunion refunded the illegally seized duesto avoid further litigation and possiblestate prosecution.

“Teacher union bosses and schoolofficials ignored state law and U.S.Supreme Court precedent to illegallycoerce Amy Anaya into full dues-payingunion ranks against her will,” said MarkMix, President of National Right toWork. “This case teaches all of us a les-


Many donors are winding up their 2012 tax sub-missions and are asking themselves what theycan do this year to maximize tax savings for2013.

The following options will give you some ideasabout how to support the work of the NationalRight to Work Legal Defense Foundation bymaking a tax-deductible gift:

1. Gifts of cash - provides a tax deductionfor the 2013 tax year;

2. Gifts of appreciated stock/securities heldmore than 12 months - provides a tax deduc-tion for the full market value and no capitalgains tax;

3. Review plans for an estate gift through awill - the most common form of planned giftwith a bequest to the Foundation;

4. Gift annuity - provides a tax deduction in2013 and an income stream for you for life(not available in all states);

5. Charitable lead trusts and charitableremainder trusts.

All of these options are available to you today,and we urge you to consult your tax advisor orattorney to consider the best planned givingoption for you and your family

As with any planned gift, we encourage youto contact your estate attorney or tax advi-sor to help you and your family achieve your

financial goals.

Need more information? Contact GinnySmith at (703) 770-3303 or via email at

[email protected]

Tax Season Looms:

Charitable

Giving

Options

Make Donations of Stock or Securities Electronic Transfer of Securities to:

Bank of America, N.A. 100 W. 33rd Street New York, NY 10001

First Credit: Merrill Lynch 11951 Freedom Drive, 17th Floor

Reston, VA 20190 Routing (ABA) Number: 026009593

DTC# 5198 Account # 6550113516

FBO: National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation, Inc. Foundation Account #86Q-04155

involved with as a union lawyer. CurrentNLRB Member Michael Griffin alsoworked as a union lawyer before joiningthe Board.

“As our Legal Director noted in histestimony before Congress, the Boardhas shown a total disregard for the rightsof independent-minded employees,”said Mark Mix, President of theNational Right to Work Foundation.“We hope this will serve as a wake-upcall to citizens concerned about theBoard’s pro-forced unionism bias.”


WASHINGTON, DC - On February 13,Ray LaJeunesse, Vice President andLegal Director of the National Right toWork Foundation, testified before a sub-committee of the House Committee onEducation and the Workforce about theneed to more vigorously enforceemployees’ rights to refrain from fund-ing union politics.

LaJeunesse, who has over 40 years ofexperience on the Foundation’s legalstaff and has argued four cases beforethe U.S. Supreme Court, repeatedly crit-icized the National Labor RelationsBoard (NLRB) for its lax enforcement ofthe rights of workers who wish to refrainfrom union affiliation. Under theFoundation-won Supreme Court prece-dent Communication Workers v. Beck,private sector employees have the rightto refrain from paying for union activi-ties unrelated to workplace bargaining,such as members-only events and unionpolitical activism. However, the Obama-era NLRB has shown little interest inhelping employees assert their rights toopt out of paying for union politics.

NLRB throws up bureaucratic hurdles to employee rights

LaJeunesse pointed out that theBoard has permitted union officials toinstall a number of bureaucratic hurdlesthat discourage independent-mindedemployees from asserting their Beckrights. LaJeunesse noted that manyunions now require employees to annu-ally renew their objections to unionpolitical spending during a designated“window period,” a practice that allowsunion officials to continue extractingfull dues from nonunion employees ifthey miss an arbitrary filing deadline.

Moreover, the Board has recently

held that nonunion employees can becharged for organizing activities andpolitical lobbying for “goals that are ger-mane to collective bargaining.”LaJeunesse noted that this elastic inter-pretation of the Supreme Court’s Beckstandard undermines the ability ofnonunion employees to refrain fromfunding ideological and organizingactivities they may disagree with.

“In sum, the problem is systemic,”concluded LaJeunesse. “The Board hasdismally failed to protect workers’ Beckrights. Indeed, the current Board seemsbent on totally eviscerating thoserights.”

Obama Appointees Kowtowto Big Labor

Unfortunately, the Board – a suppos-edly neutral arbiter of American laborlaw – has been stacked with pro-BigLabor appointees throughout theObama Administration. Former NLRBMember Craig Becker actually workedfor the SEIU and AFL-CIO before join-ing the Board and ruling on cases he was

Foundation Legal Director Warns Congress of NLRB’s Big Labor BiasTestimony highlights Board’s indifference to individual workers’ rights

Right to Work Legal Director Ray LaJeunesse criticized the Board’s approachto employee rights in his testimony before Congress.

Newsclips Requested

The Foundation is always on thelookout for stories exposing unionmalfeasance. Send any stories thatappear in your local paper to:

NRTWLDFAttention: Newsclip Appeal

8001 Braddock RoadSpringfield, VA 22160

Supporters can also email onlinestories to [email protected]

WASHINGTON, DC - This February,the U.S. Supreme Court preserved animportant Foundation legal victory bydenying appeal filed by Oklahoma-based Teamster bosses. The Teamsterswere challenging a ruling that struckdown a discriminatory union policyaimed at nonmember workers employedby Interstate Bakeries in Oklahoma.

Kirk Rammage was the single non-member sales representative with DollyMadison for over 15 years before hisdivision was merged in 2005 withWonder Bread/Hostess. During themerger, Teamsters Local 523 union offi-cials insisted that union membersreceive preferential treatment by puttingRammage at the bottom of the seniorityroster despite his longer workplacetenure.

With free legal assistance fromNational Right to Work staff attorneys,Rammage filed federal charges againstthe union with the National LaborRelations Board (NLRB). The NLRBsubsequently ruled against the discrimi-natory Teamster policy. The U.S. Courtof Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheldthe NLRB’s decision after Teamsterlawyers appealed the Board’s ruling.Unfortunately, those rulings were laternullified when the U.S. Supreme Courtruled that the NLRB lacked a threemember quorum at the time of its deci-sion.

After reaching a quorum and revisit-ing the facts of the case, the NLRB againconcluded that Teamster officials brokethe law. The Tenth Circuit upheld theagency’s ruling again and slappedTeamster Local 523 with monetarysanctions for the frivolous nature of theunion’s second appeal.

Finally, union lawyers appealed thecase to the U.S. Supreme Court. TheCourt has since denied their appeal,leaving Rammage’s victory intact.

Dear Foundation Supporter,

As this issue of Foundation Action goes to print, I’ve just returned fromMichigan, which celebrated becoming the 24th Right to Work state. After ahard-fought victory in a state long shackled by the forced-unionism privi-leges of Big Labor, Michigan’s Right to Work protections went into effect onMarch 28.

Just one year earlier, Indiana became the 23rd Right to Work state. Andthese moves followed on the heels of the long, hard fight to reformWisconsin’s government-sector labor laws that captivated the nation.

Frankly, in all my time in the Right to Work movement, I’ve never seenanything quite like it. Americans are seeing the havoc to budgets wreakedby Big Labor’s grip on state and local governments and the corruption ofour politics caused by the union bosses’ forced-dues powers.

None of these battles are truly over, and that’s where your National Rightto Work Foundation comes in. Our dedicated team of staff attorneys isdefending these reforms from desperate legal assaults.

Make no mistake: Big Labor won’t give up their powers quietly.

But I’m confident we have the moral, economic, and legal arguments onour side. I’m even more confident because I know you have my back.

Thank you!

Sincerely,

Mark Mix


Message from Mark Mix

PresidentNational Right to WorkLegal Defense Foundation

y,y,y

UPDATE: Supremes Won’t

Preserve Discriminatory Policy

Victory against Teamster bosses stands

march-april 2013 issue of foundation action

Documents