Local Union Bosses Face Federal Labor Charge for Illegally Taking Money from Workers’ Paychecks

Union officials’ illegal forced-dues scheme highlights need for Right to Work law

Detroit, MI (October 22, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Farmington Hills-based nursing home employee has filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against a local Service Employees International Union (SEIU) affiliate.

In October 2009, Donna Smith, a Botsford Common Nursing Home custodian, refrained from formal, full-dues-paying union membership from the SEIU Healthcare Michigan union.

Under Foundation-won precedent in the Supreme Court case Communication Workers v. Beck, the Court held that nonmember employees in states without Right to Work protections for its workers may still be forced to pay certain union fees as a condition of employment, but they do have the right to refrain from paying union dues spent for activities like political activism, lobbying, and member-only events.

Despite her being a nonmember, SEIU union officials continued to collect full union dues from Smith’s paycheck for 10 more months. In September 2010, Smith and SEIU union officials reached a settlement in which she received the difference of full union dues and the union fees that she is forced to pay for the union bosses’ so-called “representation.”

Read the entire release here.

Manny Lopez from the Detroit News comments on the United Autoworker (UAW) union hierarchy's "new" strategy of organizing workers, (i.e. using even more intimidation and harassment to force additional workers into their dues-paying ranks):

Bob King, the new president of the UAW was stumping for democracy yesterday, and you'd think that it would be hard to corrupt such a thing.

But he did. See, democracy to the unions means do it our way, or no way.

King said the UAW will try a new tactic to organize foreign automakers. The membership-declining union is going to draft a set of principles that will bar companies from using derogatory, untruthful or threatening statements to dissuade workers from organizing (as if that was a one-way street).

"Any company that does not agree to the UAW principles is essentially declaring war on freedom of speech and assembly," he said.

Ta-da, the "shame campaign" (my interpretation, not his).

Those that don't sign on will be labeled as being against the First Amendment.

But as Lopez correctly points out, UAW union hypocrites seem the least bit interested in protecting Michigan workers' rights to also not be forced to associate with something they want no part of:

In fact, the UAW's push for freedom could be a good thing if it were universally open to such a thing. How about the UAW abide by its own new interest in openness and allow its members in Michigan and other forced unionism states to also have the freedom to decide whether they want to be in the union?

I'll buy into the UAW's campaign for the First Amendment and the freedom of speech and assembly when it gives its workers in every state that same opportunity.

How about it Mr. King? Let's make Michigan a right-to-work state. Or is the freedom to choose limited to certain circumstances?

And not only would Right to Work protections be great for workers' rights, it would also be good for their wallets.  Now that's a "new" strategy Michigan's families could support.

Citizen Activist Seeks to Bring Union Boss Lobbying Disclosure Battle to Michigan Supreme Court

Teacher union bosses hiding taxpayer-funded political communications from public

Detroit, MI (January 28, 2010) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a citizen activist announced today he will file an appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court in an ongoing public disclosure battle over the use of school district e-mail systems for union political activities.

In 2007, political activist Chetly Zarko from DeWitt – invoking Michigan’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosure law – requested e-mail communications among Howell Education Association (HEA) union brass regarding heated collective bargaining negotiations between the Howell Public School (HPS) system and union officials. The HEA union is a local affiliate of the Michigan Education Association and National Education Association unions.

At the time of the collective bargaining conflict, Zarko suspected union boss lobbying was occurring at taxpayer expense. Zarko is seeking the release of approximately 5,500 e-mails between the union hierarchy and teachers.

Click here to read the full release.

Experts from the National Right to Work Foundation and Right to Work Committee took to the airwaves and opinion pages across America to remind us what Labor Day is really about —  the individual worker.

Mark Mix, president of National Right to Work, reminded Americans that "It's 'Labor' Day, Not 'Union' Day" in his nationally published op-ed which appeared in over 20 newspapers across the country.  In his article, Mix offers a stouthearted rebuke to the usual union boss propaganda which has become commonplace on Labor Day:

This Labor Day, big labor bosses will dish out their usual Labor Day propaganda about how awful our lives would supposedly be without them.  The reality is that millions of workers and indeed our economy are continuing to suffer greatly under the scourge of compulsory unionism.

...

Labor Day should be about honoring the hardworking Americans who make our country’s economy prosper — not union bosses who rely on forced unionism privileges for personal and political gain.

Mark Mix also took to the airwaves, appearing on The Dom Giordano Show, The Martha Zoller Show, and the national CBS radio network.  He also appeared on WFTL Morning News the morning after Labor Day.  Meanwhile, Mix's Labor Day statement was aired on at least 10 radio stations in Right-to-Work states and forced-unionism states alike. 

Mix was also published in the Detroit News discussing how union boss monopoly bargaining is bankrupting Detroit’s public schools -- pointing out the reality that "[t]he Detroit school district would be much better off if state legislators and [Michigan] Gov. Jennifer Granholm repealed or dramatically rolled back state policies promoting union monopoly bargaining in public schools."

Mix also was published on National Review Online exposing the stunning resemblance forced unionism has to the launching of President Barack Obama's political career:

Why is Obama so comfortable with this coercive approach to workplace organizing? Perhaps because his political career was launched under similar circumstances. Few remember it now, but Obama’s electoral debut came in 1996, when he won a seat in the Illinois state legislature. “Won” is a bit of a misnomer, however, as candidate Obama ruthlessly eliminated his opponents by disqualifying signatures collected for ballot eligibility.

As former National Review political reporter David Freddoso detailed in his 2008 book on Obama, voters’ signatures were thrown out for a variety of spurious reasons, including one woman’s failure to list her married name instead of her maiden name. Other voters were struck from the lists for printing instead of signing their names on the eligibility petitions. Obama not only had his main opponent disqualified, he also succeeded in forcing a protest candidate off the ballot. Obama has personally admitted he felt “uncomfortable” with this hardball political tactic, but success has evidently allayed any guilt. After his opponents were disqualified, Obama won a seat in the state legislature by default.

...

In 1996, Obama’s team of political operatives succeeded in bypassing an entire election. President Obama now seeks to end elections in every workplace in the country. He has already issued a series of executive orders designed to pressure government contractors to submit to compulsory unionism. Next up on the administration’s checklist: rolling back basic union financial-disclosure guidelines. Forced unionism via card check may not be far behind.

Under card check, employees would have only one choice: submit to unionization and forced union dues. As some Chicago voters discovered in 1996, having only one choice is not a real choice at all.

The National Right to Work Committee also capitalized on the Labor Day holiday to spread the message of individual liberty.  Committee Vice President Doug Stafford appeared on the Lars Larson Show on the lead up to Labor Day.  Stafford also sat down with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review to talk of the dangers of card check forced unionism and Big Labor's political muscle.

The effort for workplace freedom continues.  National Right to Work will continue to expose the evils of compulsory unionism as we work toward a day in which no American if forced to be a member of, or pay tribute to, an unwanted union.

The Detroit Free Press reports that the Detroit Federation of Teachers union is threatening to have up to 70 teachers fired for not paying forced union dues.  A school district error is mainly responsible for the mix up. 

Yet, because of the clerical error, union official Mark O'Keefe stated that the "fair" thing to do would be to fire the teachers who fail to pay the full union dues.

No, Mark.  The "fair" thing to do is to not require teachers to pay ANY union dues as a condition of teaching Detroit's schoolchildren.

In today's Washington Examiner, Timothy Carney has an excellent column about President Obama's plan to "save" Chrysler. As Carney shows, it's more accurate to call Obama's plan a bailout of Big Labor and political payback for the UAW union's exorbitant politicking on behalf of Obama and his party in the 2008 election:

The union’s $1.98 million to Democratic candidates last cycle (not counting the $4.87 million in independent expenditures to elect Obama president) is more than any PAC spent on Republicans. If you combine the political spending of the top three oil company PACs and the UAW’s PAC, Republicans and Democrats come out about even.

Peer deeper into the UAW’s finances, and it starts to look even more like a big business. The organization sits on nearly $1.2 billion in investments. This is money the UAW took from the paychecks of workers, money that now functions as an endowment out of which the union pays its staff and subsidizes its golf resort.

Black Lake Golf Club, which the UAW brags is "one of the finest anywhere in the nation," is owned by the union. Situated at the very top of Michigan, a drive of more than four hours from Detroit, it’s not exactly accessible to the union rank and file.

The resort is subsidized by workers’ paychecks, too—the union currently has $29.6 million in loans outstanding to the resort. That’s not their only posh real estate. The UAW’s Washington headquarters, home base for the union’s $1.6 million-a-year lobbying operation, is a beautiful $2.98 million townhouse in the DuPont circle neighborhood.

While UAW membership has fallen by 32.5 percent since 2002, the national headquarters has kept its spending nearly the same—a reduction of only 1.9 percent. Add these facts together, and it starts to look like the union management exists largely to preserve union management.

These are the people who would, practically speaking, own Chrysler under Obama’s plan. These are the benefactors of Obama’s upturning bankruptcy law and threatening investors.

But Obama’s team will maintain that it’s “the workers” who are taking ownership of Chrysler under their plan. When Obama and Democrats extend future bailouts and subsidies to Chrysler, they will have even more reason to claim that they are simply helping the workingmen. In truth, subsidies and special favors for the UAW are corporate welfare, and considering the UAW’s political activities, the right word might be crony capitalism.

Read the full column here.

It's also worth remembering that the UAW is one of the most militant unions whose leaders relish in intimidating workers and lashing out at independent-minded employees.

Interested in learning about the connection between the Big Three auto bailout and compulsory unionism? Check out the latest Right to Work video:

The UAW has consistently leveraged its position as the Big Three's monopoly bargaining agent to extend forced unionism throughout the automotive sector. Now they're screaming for a federal bailout to save the entire industry. Should government really be in the businesses of saving compulsory unionism?

The answer, of course, is no. Forced unionism should be eliminated, not subsidized.