Obama Labor Board Launches Assault on Workers' Right to Secret Ballot to Remove Unwanted Union

NLRB's decision to revisit pro-worker precedent highlights Board Member Craig Becker's refusal to recuse himself despite massive conflicts of interest

Washington, DC (September 1, 2010) – In a decision dated August 27 but only released yesterday, three members of the National Labor Relations Board granted review of a landmark 2007 case in which the federal labor board granted employees the right to demand a secret ballot election to remove an unwanted union within 45 days after the union obtained monopoly bargaining status through the coercive card check process.

In late 2009, union lawyers initiated a strategy to overturn the Dana Corp. decision won by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys. In a series of cases nationwide, union lawyers asked the NLRB to revoke the new protections to workers swept into union ranks through card check forced unionism, and now three members of the Board – all former union lawyers themselves – have agreed to consolidate two of those cases in a review of Dana.

As the dissenting Board members point out, workers across the country have already used Dana decertification elections to kick out unwanted unions, demonstrating the unreliability of card check instant organizing campaigns. Workers frequently sign union authorization cards due to union organizers’ intimidating tactics or even outright lies about what signing a card means. To remove the limited protection of the secret ballot in these cases – as the Obama NLRB appears set to do – would deny workers the ability to vote according to their conscience and remove an unwanted union from their workplace.

Read the full press release.

In her latest syndicated column, Michelle Malkin highlights the National Right to Work Foundation's request that Attorney General Eric Holder investigate National Labor Relations Board Member Craig Becker for violating his ethics pledge by participating in cases involving his former employer, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

As Malkin notes, Becker's weak standard for recusal rests on a faulty distinction between the national union and its local affiliates.

It's no surprise that Becker now refuses to hold himself accountable for the ethics pledge he himself signed in April. As the past two years have taught us, Team Obama's operational slogan is: Rules are for fools. The contractual ethics commitment states: "I will not for a period of two years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts." Yet, Becker has participated in numerous NLRB cases involving the SEIU and its affiliates -- and is parsing the definition of "former employer" by arguing that local SEIU chapters are "separate and distinct legal entities" that don't fall under the ethics rules.

The National Right to Work Foundation, which has fought both national and local SEIU officials in court on behalf of rank-and-file workers' rights, eviscerates Becker's lawyerly blather. SEIU's own constitution considers local affiliates "constituent subordinate bodies" of the national union, the foundation notes. "Moreover, in 2009 over 85 percent of the SEIU's receipts came from a per capita tax on the locals' membership dues and fees. The national union even has the power to assume control over its locals if they do not conform to International policies."

Malkin also rightly ties Becker's installment onto the federal labor board into the Obama Administration's pattern of granting special privileges and hidden paybacks to the union bosses.

Read Malkin's entire column here and more from our Freedom@Work blog on Craig Becker here and here.

The Wall Street Journal slammed Obama recess appointee Craig Becker this week for participating in cases before the National Labor Relations Board involving his former employer, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU):

In his few months at the NLRB, Mr. Becker, former associate general counsel for the Service Employees International Union, has refused to recuse himself from most cases involving his former employer. This despite the fact that Mr. Becker signed the Obama Administration's vaunted ethics pledge, in which he promised to refrain for two years from participating in "any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer."

In true lawyerly fashion, Mr. Becker is now running for the loopholes, arguing that the SEIU proper is a "distinct legal entity" that is different from local SEIU unions. Having liberated himself from that legal barrier, Mr. Becker says he intends to continue judging disputes that feature local SEIU shops. He even convinced the NLRB's inspector general—who was asked to investigate one of the failure-to-recuse cases—to buy the separate legal entity line.

From a technical legal standpoint, SEIU locals may well be distinct from Mr. Becker's former employer. Yet the clear intention of President Obama's ethics pledge was to eliminate obvious political conflicts of interest. The example of a former SEIU lawyer like Mr. Becker sitting in judgment on cases featuring SEIU locals is Conflict 101.

No one understands better than Mr. Becker the deep organizational and financial ties between the SEIU and its locals, having been the attorney who crafted national legal strategies for use by SEIU locals everywhere. NLRB Chairwoman Wilma Liebman (another Obama appointee) has applied a more rigorous and appropriate standard of recusal for herself in cases involving her former employer, the Teamsters.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which is representing workers in several cases involving SEIU locals, sent a letter Monday requesting that the Department of Justice investigate whether Mr. Becker has violated his pledge. Let's hope Attorney General Eric Holder isn't as cavalier about that request as President Obama was with Mr. Becker's appointment.

Read more about the Foundation's letter to Attorney General Holder.

Worker Advocate Asks Attorney General Holder to Investigate Apparent Violations of Obama Ethics Pledge by Labor Board Member

Craig Becker, Obama’s recess NLRB appointee, has rejected requests to recuse himself from pending cases involving his former employer

Washington, DC (August 9, 2010) – The National Right to Work Foundation, a charitable organization that provides free legal aid to employees, today asked United States Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct an investigation into National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recess appointee Craig Becker’s participation in cases involving his former employer, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

Earlier this summer, Right to Work attorneys filed more than a dozen recusal motions against Becker, who served as associate general counsel for the SEIU and AFL-CIO before he was appointed to the NLRB during a Congressional recess. As the SEIU’s in-house lawyer, Becker litigated against Right to Work Foundation clients and developed legal strategies for SEIU local affiliates across the country. His published writings also indicate a strong level of hostility to the Foundation’s employee-oriented legal aid program.

Foundation attorneys asked Becker to step aside from any case involving Foundation-assisted workers, the SEIU, or its subordinate affiliates. Despite these apparent conflicts of interest, Becker has refused to recuse himself in every case but one.

Only the Attorney General or his appropriate designee has the authority under the Executive Order to investigate any violations of the Obama Administration ethics pledge, which Becker signed. The pledge explicitly forbids any appointee from involving themselves with a former employer for no less than two years.

Click here to read the full release.

Obama Recess Appointee Refuses to Recuse Himself in Twelve of Thirteen Cases Despite Clear Bias, Conflicts of Interest

New federal labor board member and former SEIU union lawyer Craig Becker thumbs his nose at much-touted Obama ethics policy

Washington, DC (June 9, 2010) – Craig Becker, President Barack Obama’s controversial recess appointee to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), responded this week to 13 motions for his recusal filed by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys in cases pending before the Board.

After President Obama installed Becker on the NLRB in late March, Foundation attorneys quickly filed recusal motions in all Foundation-supported cases due to Becker’s extreme level of hostility against the Foundation and its legal arguments for workers’ rights, even when the NLRB or United States Supreme Court have agreed and ruled against unions for their abusive practices. Additionally, some of the cases directly involve affiliates of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Becker’s employer up to the date of his recess appointment.

But Becker has only agreed to recuse himself in Dana Corp., one pending case in which Becker’s conflict of interest was so great even he could not ignore it. In that case, Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges against an employer and the United Auto Workers (UAW) union for illegal pre-recognition bargaining. In exchange for active company assistance during a coercive card check organizing campaign, UAW union officials made explicit concessions as to workers’ wages and benefits. Becker himself coauthored a joint brief for the UAW and AFL-CIO union hierarchy in that case.

Click here to read the full release.

Here's an update on National Right to Work's ongoing effort to hold Big Labor-affiliated Obama appointees accountable.

Following the initial round of filings, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have now filed supplements to their motions asking National Labor Relations Board Member Craig Becker to recuse himself from pending cases.  In addition to the former SEIU and AFL-CIO union lawyer's clear bias and hostility toward the Foundation, Becker's signed Ethics Pledge should preclude his participation in cases in which he and his clients had direct involvement.  The relevant portion of the Ethics Pledge:

I will not for a period of 2 years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.

In one of the cases in which Becker should recuse himself, SEIU affiliate Service Workers United have asked the NLRB to overturn the landmark 2007 decisions Dana Corp.  Won by Foundation attorneys, Dana held that workers have 45 days to demand a secret ballot election to toss out an unwanted union after the union achieved monopoly bargaining status through the intimidating card check process.

But Becker actually submitted a legal brief to the Board on behalf of the AFL-CIO and UAW in that very case.   It would be highly unethical for Becker to rule on the validity of a prior Board case in which he served as counsel.

While his controversial nomination was stalled in the Senate, Becker also promised to recuse himself from cases involving his former employer, the radical SEIU union.  The real test of his ethics, however, comes with cases involving SEIU affiliates and locals.

As Foundation attorney Glenn Taubman explains in one of the motion supplements, in the 2009 Supreme Court case Locke v. Karass the SEIU International (Becker's former employer until the very day of his recess appointment) admitted to operating "a 'pooling' scheme to fund, and thereby control, the litigation of all of its local unions."  

In the present case, Foundation attorneys have asked the NLRB to review a case involving SEIU Local 121RN union officials' threats to nurses of financial penalties and even arrest for refusing to abandon their patients during a union-ordered strike.  

Will Becker adhere to the plain language of the ethics pledge and recuse himself from these cases which are substantially related to his former employment?  Unfortunately, the precedent in the Obama Administration isn't encouraging.

Today, Craig Becker - Associate General Counsel for the AFL-CIO and radical SEIU - officially took his seat on the National Labor Relations Board. For a rundown of Craig Becker's controversial recess appointment to the NLRB, listen to these two recent radio interviews featuring National Right to Work President Mark Mix.

First, Mark Mix sat down with nationally-syndicated radio host Lars Larson for a short primer on Becker's forced unionism agenda. Click here to listen or use the emebedded player below:

Second, here's a longer interview with Mix from the Jason Lewis Show on Becker's radical views. Click here to listen or use the embedded player below:

As always, you can also listen to the Foundation's podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed. 

Last week, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed recusal motions asking Craig Becker, President Barack Obama's recess appointee to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), to remove himself from any pending cases involving Foundation attorneys based on his personal bias and malice toward the organization, as revealed by his published writings about the Foundation. Let's take a closer look.

In a 2005 article in the Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, Becker described the Foundation as "an organization that purports to represent employees...."

Only the most rabid and unthinking forced unionism militant can't see indisputable evidence that Foundation attorneys only provide free legal aid to workers. As the Washington Examiner’s Mark Hemingway notes in a column about Becker's bias,

Unions try and portray the organization as a shill for big business, but the fact is that National Right to Work is the only organization providing free legal aid to workers with grievances against their union, and is otherwise responsible for doing a lot to keep unions in check.

Currently, Foundation attorneys are assisting thousands of employees in over 200 cases nationwide. The Foundation’s legal aid program is designed to enforce employees’ existing legal rights against forced unionism abuses and to win new legal precedents expanding these rights and protections.  Here's a sample:

• Last month, Foundation attorneys filed unfair labor practice charges on behalf of Nestor Mendez, a former Vons grocery store worker who was wrongfully fired on December 14, 2009 at the request of local UFCW union officials.  Mendez seeks financial compensation for lost wages and reinstatement of his position.
• In 2001, with help from Foundation attorneys, Rod Carter received a monetary settlement from Teamsters Local 769 for its direct involvement in a bloody attack on Carter during a nationwide strike against UPS. 
• Foundation attorneys are at the forefront in protecting religious objectors’ rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  In one case, a Ohio Education Association union official told a 21-year veteran teacher to "change religions" if she wanted a religious accommodation.
• Last year Foundation attorneys helped secure a settlement for five Phoenix-based employees who filed a federal lawsuit against their employer and IBEW Local 1269 union officials for a corrupt scheme to divert sales commissions from the employees to union officials. Some of the methods used to increase the union agents’ compensation included giving union agents “double commissions” for sales made by other workers.

Why else but malice would Craig Becker write that the National Right to Work Foundation “purports to represent employees”? Foundation attorneys do not just claim to provide free legal aid to workers. They do it on a daily basis.

The undercurrent of Craig Becker’s agenda is that individual employees are irrelevant in the workplace and should be afforded no recourse against the union operatives who violate their rights.  The Right to Work principle makes no judgment on whether workers should join or support a union for whatever reason. That is a decision best left up to the individual.  The Right to Work principle is therefore not "anti-union" but anti-compulsory unionism and pro-freedom of choice. Freedom of association is a basic right, but today's unions operate via forced association. 

It's worth noting that the Foundation is entirely supported by voluntary contributions from individuals, foundations, and job providers -- unlike unions, which rely on using the power of the state to seize money straight out of unwilling workers' paychecks.  In fact, Foundation supporters come from all walks of life, sections of the country, and social backgrounds.  The vast majority of Foundation contributors -- tens of thousands of concerned citizens -- give $100 or less each year.  

There's nothing remotely "fringe" about our principle, and that's why 22 states have adopted Right to Work laws and nearly 80% of the American people agree that no worker should ever be forced to associate with a union to get or keep a job.

If you do want to find fringe views on labor law, look no further than Craig Becker himself.  "At first blush it might seem fair to give workers the choice to remain unrepresented," Becker wrote in a 1998 New Labor Forum article.  Sorry, Member Becker: it's always fair to give workers a choice no matter how many ways you look at it.

Today, the Denver Post questioned President Obama's recess appointment of radical SEIU union lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board, noting how Becker's biases against workers' rights:

From the Denver Post:

We question Becker's ability to be an arbiter enforcing fairness in union elections...Becker served as counsel to both the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the AFL-CIO. It was [SEIU] president Andy Stern who visited the Obama White House 38 times (at last count), and his union spent a reported $66 million to help the president win election.

The Post continues:

He not only supports so-called "card check," the Employee Free Choice Act that which would effectively eliminate secret ballots and strip away worker privacy when forming a union, he also advocates for the elimination of the "no union" option from workers' ballots. And he thinks employers should have no "role in union organizing campaigns and in union representation elections."

How can Americans expect Becker will exhibit impartiality?

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, for instance, already has asked Becker to recuse himself from 12 cases because "his prior writings demonstrate a bias against the group."

Read the whole Denver Post editorial here.

Right to Work President Mark Mix explains Craig Becker's radically pro-compulsory unionism agenda on Fox Business: 

For more background on Becker, check out our previous post on his appointment, including video footage of another Right to Work appearance on Fox.