From the National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation:

Washington, DC (February 2, 2012) – The National Right to Work Foundation announced today that it is launching a legal task force aimed at protecting Indiana’s newly-enacted Right to Work law.

Union officials publicly floated the idea of challenging the law in Indiana’s courts before the law was even passed by the Indiana state senate.

Indiana is the nation’s 23rd Right to Work state after the state senate passed the bill and Governor Mitch Daniels signed the bill into law on Wednesday.

Foundation attorneys have successfully defended state Right to Work laws in the past, including Oklahoma’s. The task force has already examined reported union lines of attack and determined that Indiana’s Right to Work law is on sound legal ground. (more…)

Rouge NRLB Blocking Probe

House Government Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) accused the National Labor Relations Board of being a “rogue agency” in a letter to its general counsel Monday. The chairman claimed the NLRB knowingly withheld damaging documents relating to his committee’s probe of the agency’s controversial Boeing complaint, the Investors Business Daily Reports:

Issa was referring to a cache of emails obtained earlier this month by the watchdog group Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act.

He expressed anger that the emails were not turned over to his committee first and said the messages demonstrated the agency’s lack of impartiality. He further alleged that some of them contradicted claims NLRB staffers made as part of his committee’s probe.

NLRB spokeswoman Nancy Cleland said the agency had not withheld the emails. She said that the committee’s requests and the FOIA requests that produced the emails were handled separately by different people and that caused confusion.

“Because the documents were being produced on separate tracks, the Committee had not yet received some materials at the time they were provided to Judicial Watch. It is the Agency’s intent to provide those materials as part of its next, and fourth, delivery of documents later this week,” Cleland said in a statement to IBD, adding that in the future the committee requests will be given priority over FOIA requests.

The 505 pages of emails do not contain especially startling revelations. For the most part, the NLRB staffers appear to be very circumspect in their messages to each other. There are several redacted sections, most citing FOIA exceptions for privacy and attorney work product.

Nevertheless in several cases NLRB staffers do offer some personal commentary on the Boeing case and the effect is not unlike listening in at the watercooler. Those messages show the staff to be enthused at the prospect of bringing the aerospace giant to heel and disdainful of their critics on the case.

At the time of the Boeing case, its chairwoman was Wilma Liebman, a former Teamsters lawyer. Obama had also appointed former Service Employees International Union lawyer Craig Becker to the five-member board. Only one board member was a Republican.“The unprecedented NLRB decision to attack Boeing seemed abusive on its face and cried out for further investigation. And we suspected it was done at the behest of union interests and not the public interest. The pro-union email traffic we uncovered confirm this,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, in an email to IBD.

NLRB attorney, John Mantz, forwarded Willen a link to a Wall Street Journal op-ed by South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley. The GOP governor was criticizing Obama and his “union-beholden appointees at the National Labor Relations Board” for launching “a direct assault on the 22 right-to-work states across America.”“Deb, have you seen this?” Mantz wrote. Willen didn’t apparently respond, but did forward the link to another attorney, Jayme Sophir, who gave a one-word response: “Ugh.” (more…)

In Virginia, voters get a choice between Obama’s Former-Democrat National Committee Chairman and chief Obamanomics cheerleader Tim Kaine or  freedom champion Former-Governor George Allen.  George Allen has championed freedom for for employees from forced-dues as Governor and U.S. Senator.  His campaign has announced that he intends to continue to fight compulsion for both workers and businesses  if he is elected to the U.S. Senate in 2012.

From Wesley Hester at the Richmond Times-Dispatch:

Republican U.S. Senate candidate George Allen will today roll out his “Freedom to Work Act,” a three-pronged blueprint to free U.S. businesses of what he sees as onerous burdens imposed by the federal government.

Allen will unveil his plan at Botetourt County-based Dynax America Corp., a Japanese subsidiary that manufactures parts for automotive transmissions. Allen recruited the business to the state as governor in 1996.

The goals of the plan, Allen said Tuesday in an interview with The Times-Dispatch, are to “help businesses create jobs, save the taxpayers money and protect the liberty of working men and working women.”

[T]he plan would amend the National Labor Relations Act to prevent workers from being compelled to pay union dues or fees to obtain or keep a job and guarantee workers the opportunity to cast a secret ballot before a union can be organized.

“No working man nor working woman should have to pay union dues or fees of say $700 a year as a condition of getting or keeping a job,” he said. “That’s just a matter of liberty.”

“Freedom of Movement,” would strip the National Labor Relations Board of the power to order any employer to move, shut down, or transfer employment.

Allen’s plan would also seek to prohibit project labor agreement requirements on federal and federally assisted construction contracts, and repeal Davis-Bacon wage laws, which require that federal government construction contract workers be paid no less than the locally prevailing wages and benefits on similar project.

Longshoremen union president convicted in no-show job case

The Longshoremen’s union (ILA) continues to be on the Big Labor bad-boy list at the U.S. Department of Labor’s Inspector General’s union racketeering division.  While a union officer, Frank Rago, who was president of Local 1604 and an ILA international representative, “made unlawful payments and falsified documents.” More from the Stoneham Patch:

A Stoneham man and former International Representative of the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) was sentenced to one year and one day in prison on charges that he made unlawful payments and falsified documents Monday in U.S. District Court in Boston, according to a U.S. Department of Justice press statement.

At Monday’s sentencing, the court dismissed a second conviction of unlawful labor payments, the statement reads. Rago was also sentenced to three years of supervised release and ordered to pay $216,384 in restitution and $10,000 forfeiture.

Upon being appointed as an ILA representative, Rago secured a no-show job with the employer of Local 1604 members so that he could continue making his prior linehandler’s salary without performing any work, the statement reads. Rago directed that his salary would be financed from deductions from the contractual wage earnings of the Local 1604 members.

United States Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz; Mark Neylon, District Director, Boston District Office for the United States Department of Labor – Office of Labor Management Standards; and Robert Panella, Special Agent in Charge of the Office of Inspector General – Office of Labor Racketeering and Fraud Investigations for the United States Department of Labor; made the announcement Monday.

From a 2008 DOL report that the Obama DOL has discontinued providing:

On September 15, 2008, in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Frank Rago, President of International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) Local 1604 (located in Boston, Mass.) was indicted with failure to maintain records and making false entries in union and Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) records. The indictment follows an investigation by the OLMS Boston District Office.

Critical Right to Work Case Could Head to Supreme Court

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed the initial brief with the United States Supreme Court, which is reviewing a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that forced nonunion California state employees to fund union officials’ political activism.

Foundation attorneys, who are litigating the case, filed the brief Monday for the eight California civil servants who initiated a class-action lawsuit against the California State Employee Association (CSEA) union, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

In 2005, CSEA union officials imposed a “special assessment” to raise money from all represented state employees for a union political fund, regardless of their membership status. The political fund was used to defeat several ballot proposals, including one that revoked public employee unions’ special privilege of using forced fees for political contributions unless an employee consents. Employees who refrained from union membership were given no chance to opt out of the CSEA union’s political fund.

Under the Right to Work Foundation-won Supreme Court decision Teachers Local 1 v. Hudson, public employees forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment must be notified of which part of their dues are spent on union activities unrelated to collective bargaining and be given an opportunity to opt out of paying for members-only events and union boss political activism.

In 2007, a federal district court ruled that the CSEA was required to provide a notice to nonunion employees about the assessment, allow them to opt-out of paying into the union political fund, provide a refund of monies spent on union-boss politics, and pay interest from the dates of the deductions to nonmembers who chose to opt out.

After CSEA union lawyers appealed the case, a Ninth Circuit panel reversed that decision in December 2010. On June 27, 2011, the United States Supreme Court announced it would review the Ninth Circuit’s ruling.

“Allowing the Ninth Circuit’s ruling to stand would further undermine state employees’ First Amendment rights and encourage union bosses to extract more forced dues from nonunion workers as a condition of employment,” stated Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “It is unconscionable for a court to force employees who want nothing to do with the union or its so-called ‘representation’ to subsidize union political activities.”

Posted in: Court Cases, NRTWLDF

Big Labor Political Money Bombs

Big Labor is “refocusing” their political spending – funded through forced labor dues — to defeat state legislators who voted for reform measures like those in Wisconsin. Some in the media are portraying this as bad news for national Democrats who receive upwards of 93% of all union contributions, but as the head of the National Education Association (NEA) says, ” we can multitask.”

Funds gained through a confiscatory scheme that does not give workers a choice or a say in the matter gives the union bosses the ability to spend an almost unlimited about on political campaigns — and spend they will. Big labor spent over $1 billion in politics in 2010 and will break all spending records in 2012. Larry Scanlon, the political director of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, says their spending alone will top the $90 million they spent last year.

Pay Your Own Way — Unconstitutional?

Big Labor union bosses in Illinois are fuming over a proposal that would require government workers to pay more toward their retirement. In fact, according to the head of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union, such a proposal — which is commonplace in the private sector — would violate the state’s constitution.

The arrogance of Big Labor never ceases to amaze. No wonder taxpayers, including private sector union members, have turned against the greed and entitlement mentality of government unions.

Big Labor Sues Governor

In South Carolina, unions have run to the courthouse to sue new Governor Nikki Haley who has vowed to protect the state’s Right to Work laws. Haley has nominated Catherine Templeton to run the state’s labor agency and union lawyers are claiming her nomination somehow intimidates or coerces workers into not joining a labor union. Even though the lawsuit is farcical on its face, union bosses have never raised objections to coercion when it comes to forcing workers into labor unions.