In the wake of National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) move to kill the only protection workers have against card check forced unionism, the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce held a hearing yesterday about the recent onslaught of the NLRB's pro-forced unionism rulings as former-Chairwoman Wilma Liebman's term expired late last month.

Testifying at the hearing was Barbara Ivey, who works at a Portland, Oregon-based IT unit at Kaiser Permanente.

Ivey and 60 of her coworkers were subjected to a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) card check forced unionization campaign (via a neutrality agreement).

Many of Ivey's coworkers reported that they were misled or pressured by SEIU organizers into signing union cards, and didn't even know what they meant.

After the SEIU succeeded in gaining enough cards to claim monopoly bargaining privileges over the workers, the workers were told that if they didn't like it, they could file with the NLRB for a secret-ballot decertification election (per Foundation-won precedent in Dana) to overrule the card check campaign and remove the unwanted union.

After leaning about her rights with the assistance of Foundation staff attorneys, Ivey collected the necessary amount of signatures on a petition for a secret-ballot election.  But then, on August 26, 2011, the Obama NLRB overruled the Dana precedent in Lamons Gasket and the election was summarily cancelled.

Now, the employees in the Kaiser IT department are stuck with the SEIU for anywhere from one to four years before they will even have a chance to force a secret-ballot vote (and getting a decertification vote is a major uphill battle for employees who will have campaign against an entrenched union with full-time paid professional organizers).

Yesterday, Ms. Ivey shared with Congress her experiences with the unfairness of card check unionization and the one-sidedness of the Obama NLRB. You can read Barbara Ivey's testimony by clicking here (pdf).

You can watch the video of the hearing here.

Obama Labor Board Kills Important Secret Ballot Precedent

Worker advocate denounces NLRB’s ruling to take away protection workers have against card check forced unionism

Washington, DC (August 30, 2011) – Today, Barack Obama's National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) overturned its Dana Corp. decision, in which National Right to Work Foundation attorneys secured for employees the right to challenge union card check organizing campaigns with a secret ballot vote.

Under the Foundation-won Dana decision, workers may collect signatures to request a secret ballot election during a 45-day window period following notice that their employer has recognized a union based on a card check organizing drive. The ruling is intended to counteract coercive practices frequently associated with card check, which allow organizers to bully or mislead employees into signing cards that count as "votes" toward unionization.

The NLRB overturned Dana just as President Obama-appointed NLRB Chairwoman Wilma Liebman's term expired. Meanwhile, Obama-appointed Board Member Craig Becker, who co-authored a union brief in the original Dana case, refused to recuse himself from the case. Becker, a recess nominee, faces bi-partisan opposition to his confirmation in the U.S. Senate. One Board Member, Bryan Hayes, vigorously dissented and called the ruling a blatant roll back of employee freedom.

Any decertification votes that have been cast but not counted by the NLRB will now be discounted, thereby invalidating the voice of thousands of workers nationwide.

Read the entire release here.

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.

Legal Aid Foundation Demands Radical Obama-Recess Appointee to Recuse Himself from 12 Pending Cases

New federal labor board member Craig Becker has demonstrated malice against National Right to Work Foundation and pre-judged cases about workplace freedom and union boss malfeasance

Washington, DC (March 29, 2010) – After President Barack Obama installed Service Employees International Union (SEIU) lawyer Craig Becker as a recess appointee to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on Saturday, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation attorneys are now filing 12 recusal motions asking Becker to step aside in any pending case involving the Foundation.

As associate general counsel of the SEIU, Becker directly litigated against Foundation attorneys and helped orchestrate legal strategies for SEIU affiliates across the United States, so he should recuse himself from cases involving the SEIU or its affiliates. Moreover, his published writings indicate an extreme level of hostility against the Foundation and its legal arguments on behalf of workers, even when the NLRB or United States Supreme Court have agreed and ruled against union officials for their abusive practices.

The Foundation’s free legal aid cases frequently involve unfair labor practices committed by union officials, such as coercive practices to corral workers into union membership and illegal use of fees paid by nonmembers for political purposes. Becker’s record suggests he is unable to give workers who turn to the Foundation for help an impartial hearing and instead will simply rubber-stamp whatever union boss wrongdoings are put before him.

The full press release is available here.  Download two of the motions (PDF) here and here.

Employee Hits AT&T/Union Officials with Federal Labor Charges Attacking Scheme to Unionize Workers

Fearing lack of support, communications union bosses are attempting to rig election employees initiated to throw out unwanted union

Seattle, WA (February 24, 2010) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Redmond-based AT&T Mobility employee filed federal charges after union organizers illegally colluded with company officials to sweep AT&T workers across the state into union ranks in exchange for contract concessions.

Per a so-called “neutrality agreement” between the Communications Workers of America (CWA) union hierarchy and AT&T, workers in a 140-employee bargaining unit (which consists of various locations across the state of Washington) had CWA union monopoly bargaining foisted upon them after a card-check forced unionism campaign. In exchange, union officials agreed with AT&T to subject the employees to a previously negotiated contract which results in lost benefits and perks for the workers.

As part of the agreement, the workers would be swept into the CWA union’s regional monopoly bargaining unit which consists of thousands of employees – making it virtually impossible for them to later organize to remove the union officials’ monopoly bargaining privileges.

Greg Hartmann of Auburn is challenging the pre-recognition negotiations because he and his colleagues were not even aware of the terms either of the neutrality agreement or the employees’ new contract until after the card-check campaign.

Click here to read the full release.

Workers Prevail in Battle for Secret Ballot Vote After Corrupt Card Check Unionization Scheme

Communications union bosses collude with AT&T to lock local group into union ranks without majority support

Seattle, WA (February 11, 2010) – A group of AT&T Mobility employees have won a legal victory countering union officials’ domination of their workplace using a coercive card check unionization campaign that occurred after union organizers colluded with AT&T officials to sweep the workers into union ranks in exchange for contract concessions.

Per a so-called “neutrality agreement” between the Communications Workers of America (CWA) union hierarchy and AT&T, workers in a 140-employee bargaining unit (which consists of various locations across the state of Washington) were “card checked” into the CWA union’s regional monopoly bargaining unit which consists of thousands of employees.

In exchange for AT&T foisting CWA monopoly bargaining on workers through a card check organizing drive, union officials agreed to subject employees to a contract which results in lost benefits for the workers, including promotion opportunities. Moreover, the employees’ inclusion in the larger regional unit would make it virtually impossible for them to later organize to remove the union officials’ monopoly bargaining privileges.

However, using precedent won by Right to Work Foundation attorneys in the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) landmark 2007 decision in Dana Corporation, Joseph Simpson of Redmond and his colleagues filed a decertification petition demanding a secret ballot election to remove the unwanted union from their workplace.

Click here to read the full release.

In what has become an annual (or rather semi-annual) tradition, the increasingly discredited American Bar Association (ABA) is once again pointedly excluding the viewpoints of individual employees who don't want a union in their workplace.

The intellectually dishonest organization is holding its second annual Labor and Employment Law Continuing Legal Education Conference in Denver this September. The cover of the event brochure (pdf) trumpets a panel titled "Hot Topic: Neutrality Agreements, Card Checks, and Voluntary Recognition After Dana."

The core case at issue, Dana/Metaldyne, was brought and won by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys, and most of the law in this area is the result of Foundation litigation. Yet, the roster of attorneys on the panel again consists entirely of union, company, and government lawyers.

Foundation VP Stefan Gleason wrote the following about the anti-individual worker bias of the ABA back in February, the last time Foundation attorneys were excluded from speaking about its many cases, and the criticism therein is only reinforced by this latest episode:

ABA political hacks have pointedly refused to allow the perspective of employees who may, God forbid, not want a union to dominate their workplace. Once again, a hot topic at the conference was the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation's cases defending employees whose rights are abused during card check organizing drives.

And yet again, the ABA meeting planners refused to allow the perspective of workers or their Right to Work attorneys to be heard -- instead selecting speakers representing Big Labor and a small faction of squishy, union-boss-friendly management lawyers. (Of course, the views of the speakers were rejected by the NLRB in its recent Dana/Metaldyne ruling, and the views of Foundation attorneys were embraced. Just a technicality, I guess.)

The ABA's intellectual dishonesty continues to be an embarrassment to America's legal profession.

The Wall Street Journal's related article about Right to Work attorneys' victory for employees earlier this month says:

Organized labor, which has long criticized the (National Labor Relations) board under the Bush administration, charges that the recent activity is a partisan push, following several decisions reversing rulings made during the Clinton administration.

You've gotta be kidding me. Additionally, the agency has dropped the ball on these Right to Work Foundation-assisted cases.

Finally, the article fails to recognize that the Dana/Metaldyne decision doesn't even protect the very employees that brought the case! One thing's for sure, America's independent-mined employees deserve better than they've gotten on the whole from the Bush NLRB.

AFL-CIO head honcho John Sweeney and SEIU chief Andy Stern both chimed in about last week's victory on behalf of employees by Right to Work attorneys. Sweeney cites a previous NLRB decision calling coercive card check unionization drives "a favored element of national policy."

What a joke. As previously cited, the Board in this decision cited:

“Card checks are less reliable because they lack secrecy and procedural safeguards… union card-solicitation campaigns have been accompanied by misinformation… workers sometimes sign union authorization cards…to get the person off their back.”

Stern, however, gets one thing right when he says:

"The NLRB has become a caricature of itself, and as a nation, we should be embarrassed by governing bodies that fail to consider even the most basic needs and rights of workers.”

How true. The NLRB has failed America's workers in many other Foundation cases. Here are just a few.