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.

“Union bosses want to undo what thousands of Hoosier citizens have worked hard for over the past decade,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Because union partisans cannot win the hearts and minds of Indiana’s workers and voters, they seek to have the courts strike down Indiana’s popular Right to Work law for them.”

In addition to defending the Right to Work law from spurious union legal challenges, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys are, as always, available to give free legal aid to employees seeking to exercise their Right to Work. Because the Indiana law applies only to forced dues clauses entered into after March 14, 2012, many employees may not be able to cut off all dues immediately. However, those employees can still exercise their right to refrain from formal union membership and cut off union dues being spent on politics.

Public polling shows that nearly 80 percent of Americans support the Right to Work principle, including 80 percent of union members.

Information about Indiana’s Right to Work law, including how Indiana employees can exercise their Right to Work can be found on the Foundation’s website: www.nrtw.org.

For the past two weeks, Big Labor bosses around the country have had their eyes on the Indiana capitol — watching in horror as the General Assembly passed a right-to-work bill with commanding majorities.

The passage of Indiana’s right-to-work law is an extraordinarily bitter defeat for the union brass. Less than a year ago, despite the fact that Hoosiers had elected substantial pro-right-to-work majorities to both chambers in 2010, union strategists remained confident they could preserve the forced-unionism status quo.

Last year, union bigwigs convinced the entire Democratic caucus of the Indiana House of Representatives to flee the state for five weeks in order to deny the body a quorum it needed to bring up and pass right-to-work legislation. Big Labor clearly believed whatever it lacked in legislative numbers it could make up for in zeal.

But polls showed Hoosiers overwhelmingly disapproved of the “fleabagger” tactic, and right-to-work supporters kept turning up the pressure on Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels and GOP legislative leaders to fight back against Big Labor.

Thanks to legislation passed after last year’s walkout, House members failing to show up to do their jobs when the General Assembly is in session may be hit with $1,000-a-day fines.

In the opening weeks of the 2012 session, House Democrats went public about their reluctance to jump over a cliff again for the union hierarchy. Finally, on Jan. 24, House Minority Leader Pat Bauer announced an end to his caucus’ boycott of the bill. It passed the next day.

Ever since, the caterwauling by Big Labor and its allies has resounded across the state. But what’s so bad about a law that merely says an individual shouldn’t be forced at the workplace to support financially an organization that he or she doesn’t believe acts in his or her interests?

Rather than address this question, union propagandists skirt it. Union officials never act contrary to the interests of any employee, they implicitly argue. Any employee who says otherwise they brand as a hypocritical “freeloader”!

For the stewards of a so-called “workers’ movement,” labor bosses have an unbelievably antagonistic attitude toward workers.

American charities collectively took in nearly $300 billion in 2010. Yet American workers can’t be trusted to support unions that supposedly represent their interests unless they are forced to do so? No law forces two-thirds of Americans to give to charity. And yet they do.

Union officials and their friends won’t acknowledge that being forced under federal or state law to accept a union as your monopoly-bargaining agent with your employer when it comes to pay, benefits and work rules is actually not in the economic interest of many employees.

Indianapolis, Indiana – Today, Mark Mix, President of the 2.6 million-member National Right to Work Committee, praised the Indiana House and Senate for passage of the Indiana Right to Work Law.

Mr. Mix said, “This is a great day for Indiana’s workers and taxpayers.

“After a ten-year struggle involving hundreds of thousands of mobilized Hoosiers, Indiana will finally be able to enjoy all the benefits of a Right to Work law,” said Mr. Mix.

“Today, the Indiana Senate passed the Right to Work Bill by a vote of 28 to 22. The bill has already passed the House, so it now goes straight to Governor Daniels, who has vowed to sign it, making Indiana America’s 23rd Right to Work state,” continued Mix.

Mr. Mix continued, “The Right to Work Law will free nearly 200,000 Hoosiers who have been forced to pay tribute to a union boss for the privilege of getting up everyday and going to work so they can provide for their families.”

Proponents of the bill expect that passage of the Right to Work law will provide significant economic benefits for Indiana and Indiana workers.

For the past decade, non-agricultural employment in Right to Work states grew twice as fast compared to that in non-Right to Work states like Indiana, according to data from the Department of Labor.

“On the job front,” said Mr. Mix, “virtually every site selection consultant on record has testified that as many as half of their clients will not even consider expanding or relocating to non-Right to Work states.”

Governor Daniels experienced this problem firsthand, reporting recently that when Volkswagen was looking to build a production facility in America, he was unable to get the company to even return his phone calls.

Volkswagen ended up choosing to open its new facility in the Right to Work state of Tennessee.

Today’s action makes Indiana the first Right to Work state in the Manufacturing Belt, and supporters say it will give Hoosiers a significant advantage over all of its neighbors and the rest of the 27 non-Right to Work states.

“Besides enjoying an influx of new jobs, Right to Work states also enjoy higher personal income,” said Mr. Mix.

In particular, Mr. Mix drew attention to a study by Dr. Barry Poulson, a past president of the North American Economics and Finance Association and also a professor of economics at the University of Colorado, who compared household incomes in 133 metropolitan areas in Right to Work states with those of 158 metropolitan areas in non-Right to Work states.

“Among other results, he found that the average real income for households in Right to Work state metro areas, when all else was equal, was $4,258 more than non-Right to Work state metro areas,” said Mr. Mix.

Mr. Mix concluded, “I want to take a moment to thank Governor Daniels, House Speaker Bosma, Senate President Long, bill sponsors Jerry Torr and Carlin Yoder, and the men and women of the Indiana Legislature who stood up for the rights of the individual worker and voted to pass Right to Work.

“But most of all, I want to thank the thousands of dedicated Hoosiers who have stood up over the years to demand passage of the Indiana Right to Work Law.”

Indianapolis, Indiana – Today, Mark Mix, President of the 2.6 million-member National Right to Work Committee, praised the Indiana House and Senate for passage of the Indiana Right to Work Law this afternoon.

Mr. Mix said, “This is a great day for Indiana’s workers and taxpayers.

“After a ten-year struggle involving hundreds of thousands of mobilized Hoosiers, Indiana will finally be able to enjoy all the benefits of a Right to Work law,” said Mr. Mix.

“Today, the Indiana House passed the Right to Work bill by a vote of 54 to 44.  Because the Senate passed an identical bill on Monday and Governor Daniels is on record in favor of the bill, it now seems certain that after the Senate approves the House bill, Indiana will become America’s 23rd Right to Work State,” continued Mix.

Mr. Mix continued, “The Right to Work Law will free nearly 200,000 Hoosiers who have been forced to pay tribute to a union boss for the privilege of getting up everyday and going to work so they can provide for their families.”

Proponents of the bill expect that passage of the Right to Work law will provide significant economic benefits for Indiana and Indiana workers.

For the past decade, non-agricultural employment in Right to Work states grew twice as fast compared to that in non-Right to Work states like Indiana, according to data from the Department of Labor.

“On the job front,” said Mr. Mix, “virtually every site selection consultant on record has testified that as many as half of their clients will not even consider expanding or relocating to non-Right to Work states.”

Governor Daniels experienced this problem firsthand, reporting recently that when Volkswagen was looking to build a production facility in America, he was unable to get the company to even return his phone calls.

Volkswagen ended up choosing to open its new facility in the Right to Work state of Tennessee.

Today’s action will make Indiana the first Right to Work state in the Manufacturing Belt, and supporters say it will give Hoosiers a significant advantage over all of its neighbors and the rest of the 27 non-Right to Work states.

“Besides enjoying an influx of new jobs, Right to Work states also enjoy higher personal income,” said Mr. Mix.

In particular, Mr. Mix drew attention to a study by Dr. Barry Poulson, a former president of the North American Economics and Finance Association and a professor of economics at the University of Colorado, who compared household incomes in 133 metropolitan areas in Right to Work states with those of 158 metropolitan areas in non-Right to Work states.

“Among other results, he found that the average real income for households in Right to Work state metro areas, when all else was equal, was $4,258 more than non-Right to Work state metro areas,” said Mr. Mix.

Mr. Mix concluded, “I want to take a moment to thank Governor Daniels, House Speaker Bosma, Senate President Long, the bill sponsors Jerry Torr and Carlin Yoder, and the men and women of the Indiana Legislature who stood up for the rights of the individual worker and voted to pass Right to Work.

“But most of all, I want to thank the thousands of dedicated Hoosiers who have stood up over the years to demand passage of the Indiana Right to Work Law.”

###

 The National Right to Work Committee, established in 1955, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens’ organization dedicated to the principle that all Americans must have the right to join a union if they choose to, but none should ever be forced to affiliate with a union in order to get or keep a job.  Its web address is www.nrtwc.org.

Worker Advocate Challenges Constitutionality of Obama’s Controversial Labor Board Recess Appointments

Case over controversial NLRB posting becomes first legal challenge to Presidential attempt to make “recess appointments” without actual recess of the Senate

Washington, DC (January 13, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a motion in federal court challenging the legality of President Barack Obama’s recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The legal challenge is part of a larger case attacking controversial new NLRB rules that require every employer to post incomplete information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they’ve never violated or been accused of breaking federal law. The NLRB’s posting rules do not require union officials to issue information about workers’ rights to refrain from union membership or opt out of union dues. Currently employers can only be required to post notices if the Board has ruled that a violation of labor law occurred.

The Foundation’s case has been consolidated with other legal challenges to the biased NLRB notice posting rules brought by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW), and two small businesses. Those parties filed the joint motion today raising the issue of the NLRB’s lack of authority to implement the rule given the unprecedented recess appointments.

The new filings in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia case comes after NLRB lawyers notified the court that President Obama’s recent recess appointees were now parties in the ongoing legal battle. Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s New Process Steel decision, the NLRB needs three members to act. However three of the five current NLRB members were installed by unilateral Presidential appointment earlier this year, despite the fact that the Senate was not in a self-declared recess.

In the motion papers, Foundation attorneys argue that the controversial appointees to the Board are not legitimate because the U.S. Senate is still in session per the body’s rules, so there was no “recess” for the President to make appointments without Senate confirmation. Therefore the NLRB lacks the necessary quorum to implement the new posting rules. Foundation attorneys are asking the judge to rule on the constitutionality of the three recess appointees.

“President Barack Obama has already shown time and again that he is willing to abuse his executive authority to force more workers into union-dues-paying ranks,” said Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Now Obama’s executive abuse jeopardizes the constitutional balance our country holds very dear, all in the name of paying back his Big Labor benefactors.”

The implementation of the NLRB’s new posting rules, originally supposed to be in August of last year, has been twice delayed due to the legal challenge in the Foundation’s case. The rules are currently scheduled to be effective on April 30, 2012.

The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) is also a party in the case, but is not party to the Foundation’s motion.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, is assisting thousands of employees in nearly 200 cases nationwide. Its web address is www.nrtw.org.

(Source:  November-December 2011 National Right to Work Committee Newsletter)

Early this year, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) infuriated the union hierarchy, in his own state and nationally, when he introduced legislation (S.B.11) that would abolish forced union dues for teachers and many other public employees and also sharply limit the scope of government union monopoly bargaining.

In response, teacher union bosses in Madison, Milwaukee, and other cities called teachers out on illegal strikes so they could stage angry protests at the state capitol and at legislators’ residences.

Government union militants issued dozens of death threats against Mr. Walker, members of his administration, and their families. Fourteen Big Labor-backed state senators, all Democrats, temporarily fled the state to deny the pro-S.B.11 Senate majority a quorum to pass the bill.

In raucous demonstrations, union bigwigs and their radical followers actually suggested Mr. Walker’s support for public employees’ Right to Work made him similar to Mubarak, Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, or even Satan.

(This fall, national AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka gave his personal imprimatur to such ugly vituperation when he likened the Wisconsin governor to “Lucifer” in an interview published in Esquire magazine.)

Thanks in part to public support mobilized by the National Right to Work Committee’s e-mail and telecommunications activities, pro-Right to Work legislators were able to withstand the Big Labor fury and send S.B.11 to Gov. Walker’s desk. On March 11, he signed into law the measure now known as Act 10.

Forced-Unionism Supporters Pumped More Than $40 Million Into 2011 ‘Recall’ Elections

Act 10, formally known as the Budget Repair Act of 2011, took effect in June after fending off a union boss-inspired legal challenge in state court.

Act 10 now protects most public employees from being fired for refusal to bankroll an unwanted union, but leaves untouched the forced-dues privileges of most public safety and transportation union bosses.

“Despite its unfortunate exclusions, this law represents a step forward for public employees’ free choice,” said Committee President Mark Mix.

“Not surprisingly, union bigwigs are out for revenge against Mr. Walker and the legislators who helped pass the Budget Repair Act.”

As part of its ongoing campaign to obtain vengeance and ultimately repeal the Budget Repair Act, early this year Big Labor launched petition campaigns for “recall” elections of many Senate supporters of the measure.

In August, special recall elections in which pro-forced unionism candidates challenged six pro-Right to Work senators took place. Three union-label Democrat senators who had opposed Act 10, and temporarily fled the state to stop it from passing, also faced recall votes this summer.

Union bigwigs and their Democratic allies pumped more than $40 million into the nine state Senate races.

In the end, the unprecedentedly expensive legislative recall push by Big Labor enjoyed some success, as two of the six pro-Act 10 senators went down to defeat, while all three forced-unionism senators held on to their seats. However, the union political machine fell short of capturing the three seats it needed to relegate pro-Act 10 Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (Juneau) to minority status and reassume control of the chamber.

Democratic Mayor: Under Act 10, Milwaukee Will Save ‘At Least $25 Million a Year’

And that same month, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, Scott Walker’s Democratic opponent in 2010 and a bitter foe of Act 10, publicly admitted that, thanks to this very legislation, his city would save “at least $25 million a year — and potentially as much as $36 million in 2012 . . . .”

In addition to significantly reducing the fiscal strain on local governments, Act 10 has enabled Wisconsin to eliminate, without increasing taxes, a gaping state budget deficit that was projected this February to reach $3.6 billion over two years.

Finally, unlike localities in a number of other states in the Midwest and elsewhere where politicians have refused to take on government union bosses’ monopolistic special privileges, Wisconsin cities, towns and counties are not being required to resort to massive layoffs to stay solvent.

Despite all the good news that has emerged over the past few months, union officials in Wisconsin and nationwide remain as determined as ever to overturn Act 10 and reinstate compulsory union dues and fees for all types of state and local public employees.

A Huge Setback For Ohio, But a Pyrrhic Victory For Union Officials

And in 2012 Big Labor intends to continue pouring workers’ dues money into expensive recall election campaigns as part of its ongoing program to kill Act 10. First on the new list of recall targets is Scott Walker himself.

In November, Wisconsin union bosses and their allied politicians officially launched a two-month drive to collect the roughly 540,000 signatures needed to force Mr. Walker into a recall election next spring. Several prominent state Democrats, including Mr. Barrett, are openly considering running against Mr. Walker should the recall take place.

Meanwhile, in another Midwestern state that was a 2011 battleground over government forced unionism, taxpayers have already lost.

This fall, union bosses from across the country spent upwards of $50 million to forestall enforcement of an Ohio public-sector labor law reform package enacted the same month as the Badger State’s and similar in key regards.

Ohio’s S.B.5 included provisions protecting the Right to Work of all categories of state and local employees, including public-safety and transportation workers. It also reduced the scope of government union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining privileges in several other ways.

Big Labor first stopped S.B.5 from taking effect, and then dipped deep into its forced dues-funded treasuries to outspend proponents vastly and kill the measure in the cradle. This was a huge setback for Ohio — and, at the same time, a pyrrhic victory for union strategists.

The tactics to which Big Labor resorted in Ohio have a strong potential to backfire on the union brass in the near future.

Major School, Public-Safety Layoffs Appear Inevitable In Buckeye State Next Year

The TV and radio ads with which the union hierarchy flooded the Ohio airwaves from September through early November successfully diverted public attention from what S.B.5 would actually do.

“You would never have guessed it from the Big Labor ads, but S.B.5 would not have reduced at all the amount of money the state of Ohio doles out to local schools and police and fire departments,” noted Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee.

“Had it gone into effect, however, S.B.5 would have made it far less difficult for local elected officials to spend whatever money they did have at their disposal prudently, so as to provide taxpayers good services at a reasonable cost.

“And it would have protected each individual public servant’s freedom to join or not join a union.

“Now Big Labor has quashed this reform, but clearly not convinced Ohio voters their already high taxes should be even higher. That means Ohio localities, unlike Wisconsin localities, will almost certainly have to resort to mass layoffs over the next few months to keep from going broke.

“If union chiefs’ ongoing bid to subject Scott Walker to a recall election succeeds in Wisconsin, by the time he has to face the voters next year he will be able to point to a quite telling contrast between the outlook in Ohio, where Big Labor ultimately got its way in 2011, and in his state, where it didn’t.

“The contrast will not be helpful for the union political operatives who are seeking to punish Mr. Walker.

“And over time, residents of other fiscally troubled government union stronghold states will be able to see for themselves who was telling the truth in Ohio and Wisconsin, and act accordingly. That’s why, all in all, 2011 has been a hopeful year for America.”

(Source:  November-December 2011 National Right to Work Committee Newsletter)

In his writings for academic and “labor studies” journals over the years, union lawyer Craig Becker has repeatedly bemoaned the fact that U.S. labor law “does not,” as he once bluntly explained, “require employees in a plant to select a bargaining agent, if they do not want to.”

Employees’ only choice, Mr. Becker has suggested time and again, should be over which set of union officials get “exclusive” (monopoly) bargaining power to negotiate their wages, benefits, and work rules.

Thanks to President Barack Obama, Mr. Becker is in a position as 2011 winds down to begin implementing his extremist vision of what federal labor policy should be.

In March 2010, Mr. Obama did the bidding of the union hierarchy by “recess” appointing Mr. Becker to the powerful National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Mr. Becker and Chairman Mark Pearce, another ex-union lawyer installed on the NLRB by Mr. Obama, now constitute a radical Big Labor majority on a rump, three-member NLRB. (Two of the board’s five seats are currently vacant.)

And late this November Mr. Pearce and Mr. Becker okayed changes to the current procedures for NLRB certification of unions that will, in practice, significantly undermine workers’ right to choose against monopolistic union representation.

The Obama NLRB originally planned to go even further to gut workers’ “choice to remain unrepresented” — a choice Mr. Becker has indicated he doesn’t think should be legally protected at all. But intense public opposition, mobilized by the National Right to Work Committee and other allied groups, evidently influenced the NLRB to temper its haste somewhat.

Employers May Soon Be Forced To Hand Employee Phone Numbers, E-Mail Addresses to Union Dons

The revised proposal advanced by the Pearce-Becker team over the vigorous opposition of the third NLRB member, Brian Hayes, would sharply reduce the current median time frame of 38 days between the filing of a union “representation petition” and the conduct of a union election.

The effect of such a change, as former NLRB member and Right to Work supporter Peter Kirsanow has put it, will be to “utterly and completely deprive employers of the ability to communicate vital information to their employees regarding their rights and the effects of unionization.”

Of course, once employers are denied enough time to make their case, employees will ipso facto be denied the opportunity to hear both sides of the story before voting on unionization.

“Apologists for President Obama’s NLRB brazenly claim that the ‘ambush’ election scheme it is now implementing step by step represents only a few modest changes to current practice,” noted Committee President Mark Mix.

“But this is nothing other than an underhanded means of realizing the very objective Craig Becker lauded in his published writings before his NLRB appointment: Workers’ ‘choice to remain unrepresented’ would be rendered almost meaningless.

“And the ‘ambush’ elections just rubber-stamped by the NLRB are only the beginning. The NLRB is still considering a host of other harmful proposals.

“These include new rules mandating that the employer hand over employee phone numbers and e-mail addresses to union organizers at the outset of each ‘ambush’ election campaign.”

Committee Will Consider ‘All Appropriate Means’ to Protect Independent Employees

Mr. Mix vowed that the Committee would consider “all appropriate means” to protect independent employees from the Obama NLRB.

“Unfortunately, as long as Barack Obama remains President and retains his veto power, it will be difficult to rein in the NLRB,” he acknowledged.

“But at the very least, Right to Work supporters on Capitol Hill can and must prevent Mr. Obama from placing another union stooge on the NLRB to replace Mr. Becker once his ‘recess’ appointment ends this winter.”

November-December 2011 issue headlines:

Capitol Hill Support For Right to Work Growing — More Senators, Representatives Cosponsor Compulsory-Dues Repeal

Obama Bureaucrats Bolster Monopolistic Unionism — Labor Board Chipping Away at ‘Choice to Remain Unrepresented’

United Way Chief: ‘Please Support Your AFL-CIO’ — Brian Gallagher Prods Charity Workers to Assist Union Lobbyists

Lafe Solomon ‘Did What IAM Bosses Told Him To’ — E-mails Reveal Why Top NLRB Lawyer ‘Screwed up the U.S. Economy’

College Graduates Flock to Right to Work States — States Seeking a ‘Brain Gain’ Should Bar Compulsory Union Dues

All in All, ‘a Hopeful Year For America’ — Big Labor Bosses Fume as Benefits of Wisconsin Reform Spread

The experience of state after state shows that public-sector compulsory unionism as well as private-sector compulsory unionism devours job- and income-creating opportunities for taxpaying businesses and employees. Credit: Michael Ramirez/Investors Business Daily

 Union Bosses Aim to Kill Recent Buckeye State Reform Next Month

(Source: October 2011 NRTWC Newsletter)

Over the past decade, the citizens of forced-unionism Ohio have been afflicted with one of the worst-performing state economies in the country.

Across the U.S. as a whole, despite the severe recent recession, private employers’ inflation-adjusted outlays for employee compensation (including wages, salaries, bonuses and benefits) did increase from 2000 to 2010, by an average of 4.3%.

And many states fared much better than that. In the 22 states with Right to Work laws on the books protecting both private- and public-sector employees from being fired for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union, real private-sector employee compensation grew by an aggregate 11.3%.

Private employees in 20 of the 22 Right to Work states experienced 2000-2010 compensation growth greater than the national average.

Unfortunately, in the 28 states without Right to Work laws on the books, private-sector outlays for employee compensation rose only by a combined 0.7%, after adjusting for inflation. Thirteen of the 14 states with the lowest compensation growth lack a Right to Work law.

Ohio was one of just five states with negative real private-sector compensation growth over the last decade. In 2010, Ohio’s business expenditures for private employee compensation were 6.6% less than they had been in 2000.

Region, Job Mix Can’t Account For Buckeye State’s Shrinking Private Employee Compensation

When confronted with such data, apologists for the forced-unionism policies that prevailed across the board in Ohio for decades until this year try to explain them away by blaming the Buckeye State’s location in the U.S. Midwest or its historically high manufacturing density for its abysmal economic record.

But such excuses won’t wash.

From 2000 to 2010, real private-sector employee compensation in the five Midwestern Right to Work states (Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota) increased by an average of 11.5%. All five of these states enjoyed compensation growth greater than the national average.

In contrast, real private-sector compensation in Ohio and the six other Midwestern forced-unionism states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri and Wisconsin) fell by an aggregate 5.3%.

Moreover, a number of Right to Work states in which manufacturing’s share of total employment a decade ago was roughly equal to, or higher than, Ohio’s enjoyed above-average private-sector compensation growth over the past decade. Examples include Right to Work North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee.

Actions of Forced Dues-Funded Politicians Cripple Private-Sector Growth

“The evidence indicates it is the pro-forced union dues policies that have long been entrenched in Ohio, rather than any other factor, that are the source of the Buckeye State’s chronic economic woes,” charged Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee.

“Private-sector compulsory unionism and government forced unionism have both inflicted major damage on Ohio and many other states. But in recent years government union bosses have surely wrought the most harm of all. Today, most employees nationwide who are under union monopoly control are government employees.”

Mr. Mix explained: “Wherever union chiefs wield forced-dues powers, a huge portion of the loot they rake in goes into efforts to elect and reelect state and local, as well as federal, Big Labor politicians.

“Such politicians have a broad agenda that greatly impedes private-sector job and income growth.

“Fortunately, this spring two states enacted significant reforms that — if they withstand ongoing Big Labor-led attempts to remove them from the books — can begin undoing the damage over the course of the next few years.

“Ohio’s new public-sector Right to Work law, still often referred to as Senate Bill 5, includes provisions protecting the Right to Work of all categories of state and local employees. S.B.5 also reduces the scope of government union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining privileges in several other ways.

“S.B.5 is more comprehensive than the other state public-sector Right to Work law enacted in March, Wisconsin’s Budget Repair Act.

“The Badger State law protects the freedom of teachers and many other public employees to refuse to bankroll an unwanted union, but leaves untouched the forced-dues privileges of public-safety and public-transportation union bosses.”

National Right to Work Helped Mobilize Public Support For Reforms

“Grass-roots support for the public-sector Right to Work measures in Ohio and in Wisconsin was mobilized, in significant part, by the Committee’s e-mail and telecommunications activities,” Mr. Mix noted.

“Both these laws represent important advances for the Right to Work cause — especially the Ohio statute, because it protects all state and local employees from forced union dues. But both laws are also in danger of being reversed.”

The more immediate threat to Right to Work is in the Buckeye State.

During the spring and early summer, union strategists successfully collected the number of signed petitions needed to block implementation of S.B.5 and put their forced-dues reinstatement referendum before voters on November 8.

In Wisconsin, a Big Labor-inspired court challenge that had kept the Budget Repair Act in limbo for months was rebuffed by the state Supreme Court in June.

However, a second legal bid to invalidate the law, filed by lawyers representing a host of government unions, is now pending in federal court.

“The National Committee is offering our advice and counsel, as well as financial resources, to Ohio citizens who are battling to keep their new public-sector Right to Work law on the books,” said Mr. Mix.

“And in Wisconsin, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys have helped three public servants file a motion to intervene in the ongoing Big Labor lawsuit to overturn the Budget Repair Act.

“If the motion succeeds, these independent-minded employees will be able to present their own arguments to the court for why their Right to Work should continue to be legally protected.”

Big Labor Flooding Ohio Airwaves With Ads Designed To Confuse Electorate

As this month’s Right to Work Newsletter goes to press, national and state union bosses are spending millions of dollars, most of it derived from dues and fees employees are forced to pay as a job condition, to defeat Issue 2, the Ohio referendum that must pass if S.B.5 is to take effect and become permanent law.

“Union officials clearly know that the overwhelming majority of Ohioans support the principle that no one should be denied a job, or lose a job, because he or she refuses to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union,” commented Mr. Mix.

“Big Labor is also well aware of the fact that, in a state where, over the last decade, private-sector compensation has fallen by more than six percent, but state and local government compensation has increased by nearly 12%, voters know something must be done to restore the balance.

“That’s why the TV and radio ads with which the union hierarchy is now flooding the Ohio airwaves try to divert public attention from what S.B.5 would actually do and frighten people with talk about slashing school and public-safety budgets.

“The fact is, S.B.5 does not say anything about how much money the state of Ohio will dole out to local schools and police and fire departments in the future.

“It will, however, make it far less difficult for local elected officials to spend whatever money they have at their disposal prudently, so as to provide taxpayers good services at a reasonable cost. And it will protect each individual public servant’s freedom to join or not join a union.”

Mr. Mix vowed that the National Committee would throughout this month and over the first week in November contact hundreds of thousands of identified Right to Work supporters in Ohio to ensure that they understand what is at stake in Issue 2, and act accordingly.

From the Richmond Times by NRTW President Mark  Mix:

Weathering an economic downturn is never easy, but some states are managing better than others.

Despite the recession, Virginia boasts a modest unemployment rate, and its average hourly wages top the national mean. What’s the Old Dominion’s secret? One factor that sets Virginia apart from its less fortunate neighbors is the state’s popular Right to Work law.

Virginia’s Right to Work law ensures that no employee can be forced to join or pay dues to a union just to get or keep a job. Protecting employee choice has always been the most important argument in favor of Right to Work, but Virginia’s economic performance is another point for worker freedom.

Recent studies from the Cato Institute and the National Institute for Labor Relations Research indicate that right-to-work states enjoy higher job growth and more disposable income (after adjusting for families’ cost-of-living) than their forced-unionism counterparts.

Eight of the top 11 states for wage and salary growth enjoy right-to-work protections. Meanwhile, 13 of the 14 worst performers lack right-to-work laws.

Workers and their families are also voting with their feet: According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, the young adult population in forced-unionism states has basically stagnated since 1980. Virginia, on the other hand, continues to attract a stream of new workers and entrepreneurs.

Protecting worker freedom also prepares states to handle a difficult recession better than their forced-unionism counterparts.

Virginia’s robust job and wage growth compares favorably with the sluggish performance of union-dominated states like Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin.

Not only that, but Virginia has been mercifully free from the type of political disruption plaguing forced-unionism states that try to tighten their belts by curbing the excesses of monopoly unionism.

Wisconsin and Ohio legislators endured disruptive protests and vicious, union-backed political campaigns because they had the temerity to challenge Big Labor’s public-sector stranglehold, an arrangement that drives up the cost of government while handing taxpayers the bill.

In states without public sector right-to-work protections, union bosses often funnel nonunion workers’ forced dues into coordinated political campaigns to protect and expand their special privileges.

As a result, every attempt to rein in government spending is met with fierce opposition from government union operatives, who will do almost anything to defend their forced-dues revenue stream.

The “Battle of Madison” in Wisconsin may have grabbed national headlines, but Richmond managed to avoid a similar showdown.

Virginia legislators were free to adjust their budgets to difficult and rapidly-changing economic conditions without the threat of massive, forced-dues-funded union politicking hanging over their heads.

Protecting worker freedom will always be at the core of Virginia’s longstanding Right to Work law. But in the midst of the worst recession in recent memory, the tangible economic benefits of Right to Work are worth appreciating, too.

By Mark Mix

Most Americans realize that Labor Day is about celebrating workers, not union bosses, but that won’t stop Big Labor’s apologists from stealing to spotlight to demand more power.

The fact is that modern unions are built on the legal privilege of compulsion. In 28 states without Right to Work laws, nonunion employees can be fired for refusing to pay union dues. Millions more nonunion workers have no choice but to accept union bargaining over their wages and working conditions.

What’s more, union officials routinely funnel nonunion workers’ dues into political campaigns aimed at defending or expanding their already extensive special privileges. As legislators from Wisconsin to Ohio can attest, this perverse cycle has made it extremely difficult to roll back union bosses’ workplace powers.

Big Labor thrives on a system of government-granted special privileges. But what do workers get out of this arrangement? According to union apologists, they’d be helpless without it. But the facts reveal a different story.

Compulsory unionism makes union bosses unaccountable to rank-and-file workers, whose financial support is absolutely mandatory. After all, why should union officials bother with the hard work of representing employees if they’re sitting on a forced-dues revenue stream guaranteed by the government?

The flood of forced-dues cash also breeds extravagance, abuse, and corruption. Now that Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis has rescinded several modest union disclosure regulations, workers have even less insight into how their hard-earned dues are being spent. The results are utterly predictable: Union boss spending sprees and forced-dues funded political activism take precedence over protecting worker rights.

According to The Wall Street Journal, AFSCME – the powerful government employee union – was the single largest political spender in the 2010 elections. And that’s just the tip of Big Labor’s $1 billion mid-term spending spree. Meanwhile, the AFL-CIO hosted its annual conference at Miami’s posh Fontainebleau Hotel in the depths of the 2009 recession. In 2008, The Chicago Sun-Times reported that over $25 million from five union pension funds had been diverted to all sorts of unsavory activities, including strip clubs, horse farms, and a lavish Las Vegas getaway.

Union operatives aren’t above resorting to intimidation to protect their forced-dues fiefdom. Just ask workers at Boeing’s Charleston Dreamliner plant, whose jobs are at risk because International Association of Machinist union bosses can’t stand the thought of any of the aerospace giant’s employees escaping their forced-dues clutches.

Instead of building Dreamliners at their unionized Seattle facilities, Boeing chose to locate production in South Carolina, a state whose popular Right to Work law ensures that no worker can be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment.

IAM lawyers responded by filing a spurious complaint with the National Labor Relations Board to force Boeing to move production to Washington State, where any new employees would have to pay union dues.

Never mind the fact that over a thousand Charleston jobs are at risk if IAM lawyers shut down production. For union bosses, protecting their special privileges is the only thing that matters.

In nearly 200 cases nationwide, the National Right to Work Foundation is helping employees stand up for their rights in the face of union operatives’ intimidation, coercion, and even violence. These cases underscore the extreme lengths to which union bosses will go to retaliate against anyone who refuses to toe Big Labor’s line.

Voluntary organizations – from the workplace to your local neighborhood – are quintessentially American. But Big Labor has strayed from its traditions of voluntarism. Instead of persuading workers to join up and pay dues of their own free will, union bosses increasingly rely on coercion to protect their privileged position.

If union officials really want to celebrate Labor Day, they’d renounce their special privileges and free hard-working Americans from compulsory unionism. Otherwise, their talk of “workers’ rights” rings awfully hollow.

Mix is president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

From the National Right To Legal Defense Foundation who represented the employees at Lamons Gasket and who secured the “Dana Rights” for employees against Card Check Forced Unionism until the Obama NLRB took them away with this decision:

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.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a charitable organization that provides free legal assistance to employees nationwide. The Foundation is providing free legal aid in both the original Dana case and in the newly-decided Lamons Gasket case in which the Board overturned the Dana protections. Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation made the following statement regarding the ruling:

“The Obama Labor Board’s ruling to kill the Dana Corp. precedent that allows workers a secret ballot vote to kick out a union that gained control of the workplace in an abusive ‘card check’ campaign adds to an already exhaustive list of paybacks from the Obama Administration to Big Labor.

“Big Labor and its allies have launched a full-scale assault on worker freedom and the Obama Administration is working tirelessly to appease them through bureaucratic means after they failed in Congress. The American people and their elected representatives in Congress oppose the Card Check Forced Unionism bill, but the Obama Labor Board seems determined to impose card check on American workers in every way it can.

“Taken with the NLRB’s other recent actions, the Obama Administration has made it easier for union operatives to steamroll over workers while making it next to impossible for independent-minded workers to stand up for their rights or decertify the union hierarchy.

“While the secret ballot provides at least a limited protection to ensure that union recognition enjoys the uncoerced support of a majority of employees, no worker should ever be compelled to join or pay dues to a union, or accept the union’s so-called representation, to get or keep a job.”

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, is assisting thousands of employees in nearly 200 cases nationwide. Its web address is www.nrtw.org.

(Video: Watch this video on the post page)

The NLRB is now proposing that private businesses post notices that workers have a right to join a union but refuses to require a similar posting that workers have the right NOT to join a union either.

Worker Advocate Denounces NLRB Rule Designed to Push Workers into Compulsory Unionism

National Right to Work Foundation President criticizes Labor Board’s decision to selectively publicize workers’ rights

Washington, DC (August 25, 2011) – Today, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) implemented new rules governing the notification of employee rights in the workplace.

Until these changes, employers were required to post notices of workers’ rights only if a violation of labor law occurred. However, the new rules require every employer to post incomplete information about employee rights online and in the workplace, even if they’ve never committed a violation or been accused of unfair labor practices. Meanwhile, union officials are not required to issue information about workers’ rights to refrain from union membership or opt out of union dues.

Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Foundation – a charitable organization that provides free legal assistance to employees nationwide – made the following statement regarding the new rules:

“The NLRB’s new rules are just the latest example of the Obama Labor Board’s biased approach to administering labor law.

“Just as the Obama administration promises to lessen the job-destroying weight of federal regulations, Obama’s NLRB comes out with a new ‘posting rule’ to saddle every business – from ‘mom and pop’ stores to IBM – with new mandatory posting requirements designed solely to grease the skids for more forced unionism.”

Read the entire release here.

According to the Illinois Review, “Many attribute Romney’s poor performance to flyers Right to Work supporters passed out at the straw poll highlighting Romney’s failure to support a National Right to Work Act.”

The Review continued:

National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix stated the following upon hearing the results:

“Mitt Romney’s lackluster performance in the Ames Straw Poll shows the importance of the Right to Work issue. With America’s economy struggling to survive, the American people want to be free from the damages of forced unionism. Americans know that a Right to Work Law would help restore the economy, and they want a president that will fight for Right to Work.”

Throughout his political career Romney has continuously refused to publicly pledge support for the National Right to Work Act. In fact, he has done everything in his power to avoid the question altogether. The most recent incident was in Concord, New Hampshire earlier this week. Once again, while discussing the Right to Work issue, Romney refused to state whether he would sign a National Right to Work Bill.

Right to Work Committee Begins Lobbying Presidential Hopefuls

(Source: July 2011 NRTWC Newsletter)

This summer, New Hampshire is the site of an extended battle over the Right to Work issue, as pro-Right to Work citizens seek to secure two-thirds majority votes in the state House and Senate to override Big Labor Gov. John Lynch’s veto of legislation (H.B.474) prohibiting compulsory union dues and fees.

Because Right to Work has been in the New Hampshire news since both chambers of the state’s General Court approved H.B.474 earlier this year, WMUR-TV (ABC) news anchor Josh McElveen decided to bring up the issue at the June 13 GOP presidential debate at St. Anselm College in Manchester, N.H.

Mr. McElveen asked former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, one of the seven 2012 presidential hopefuls participating in the debate, whether he would, if elected, support “a federal Right to Work law.”

Mr. Pawlenty ignited the debate’s longest and most enthusiastic round of applause with his response:

“We live in the United States of America, and people shouldn’t be forced to belong [to] or be a member in any organization, and the government has no business telling people what group you have to be a member of or not.

“I support strongly Right to Work legislation.”

Mr. Pawlenty thus became the fourth major-party White House aspirant in the 2012 race to endorse repeal of all current provisions in federal labor law that authorize the firing of employees for refusal to join or pay dues or fees to an unwanted union.

Previously, the two sitting U.S. representatives seeking the GOP nomination, Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Ron Paul (Texas), had pledged to support a national Right to Work law. Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson is yet another candidate who has gone on record for forced-dues repeal.

Millions of Citizens Want ‘a Clear Alternative’ to Pro-Forced Unionism Obama Administration

The enthusiastic response for Mr. Pawlenty’s principled stance, evident in a CNN “dial test” of Republicans and Independents watching on TV as well as in the auditorium itself, is something to which all the candidates should pay heed, said National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“Millions of Americans want a clear alternative to the Obama Administration’s relentless promotion of compulsory unionism,” Mr. Mix explained.

“Ever since he became President two-and-a-half years ago, Barack Obama has repeatedly championed Big Labor power grabs in Congress and appointed forced-unionism zealots to leadership positions at the National Labor Relations Board, the Labor Department, and other federal bureaucracies.

“Polls show the vast majority of Americans who regularly vote in federal elections believe the Obama Administration is just plain wrong to favor forcing workers to pay union dues to get a job.

“Freedom-loving Americans don’t favor a federal policy of ‘neutrality’ on the question of whether or not workers should be corralled into unions.

“Instead, they believe all federal labor laws should either protect the individual worker’s right to join or not join a union, or be scrapped completely.

“So far, Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Gary Johnson, and Ron Paul have grasped this point. Over the coming months, Committee members in key primary states will be doing everything they can to ensure all the other candidates reach the same conclusion.”

Right to Work States ‘Attract the Most Productive Members of Society’

In addition to the fact that it is repugnant for the government, as Mr. Pawlenty succinctly put it, to tell people “what group you have to be a member of or not,” pro-forced unionism federal labor policies put the brakes on job and income growth. This effect is especially harmful as employees and businesses strive to recover from the severe 2008-2009 recession.

The disparate economic performance of the 22 states with Right to Work laws (explicitly permitted under Section 14(b) of the federal Taft-Hartley Act), which ban forced union dues and fees, and the 28 states without such laws provides a telling, though incomplete, gauge of the damage wrought by forced unionism.

From 2000 to 2010, the inflation-adjusted outlays of private-sector businesses for employee compensation (including wages, salaries, benefits and bonuses) increased by an average of 11.8% in Right to Work states.

That increase is nine times as great as forced-unionism states’ combined 1.3% gain over the same period.

Twenty of the 22 Right to Work states experienced a real compensation increase greater than the national average of 4.9%. And 14 of the 15 states with the lowest real compensation growth lack a Right to Work law.

Because they offer superior opportunities for employees and entrepreneurs, Right to Work states “attract the most productive members of society,” as economist Arthur Laffer, Wall Street Journal senior economics writer Stephen Moore, and tax policy expert Jonathan Williams note in a new report.

Even Right to Work States Are Hurt by Federal Pro-Forced Unionism Policies

From 1998 to 2008, as Dr. Laffer, Mr. Moore, and Mr. Williams point out in the just-published fourth edition of Rich States, Poor States, which they prepared for the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC):

“[T]he population of 25-34 year olds in right-to-work states increased by 16.0 percent (from 14.361 million to 16.654 million), while the population in that age bracket for forced union states fell by 0.6 percent (from 24.32 million to 24.17 million).”

“While the 28 states that still fail to shield employees from federal pro-forced unionism labor policies naturally suffer the most as a consequence of those policies, the whole country is harmed,” noted Mr. Mix.

“Union bosses funnel a huge chunk of the forced dues and fees they collect with federal labor law’s abetment into politics. And the union-label politicians who routinely get elected and reelected because of Big Labor’s forced dues-funded support overwhelmingly favor higher taxes and more red-tape regulation of businesses.

“This is true at the federal, state and local levels. Private-sector job growth in all 50 states, including Right to Work states, is hindered by the actions of Big Labor federal politicians.

“Moreover, in today’s globalized economy, when union-boss militancy squashes job-creating business in a state, some investment is likely to go overseas. Then no American workers end up getting the jobs or income.

“For economic reasons as well as for moral reasons, Committee members are fighting to repeal all federal labor law provisions that authorize compulsory union dues and fee payments as a job condition, as well as to pass more state Right to Work laws.

“The two federal forced-dues repeal measures now pending in Congress, H.R. 2040 and S.504, would spur job growth in all 50 states. Businesses in current Right to Work states would share the benefits as their out-of-state customers and suppliers were freed from the burden of compulsory unionism.”

Right to Work Movement Strong, Growing in Early 2012 Presidential Battlegrounds

Mr. Mix said he was “optimistic” that several more 2012 hopefuls would soon join Ms. Bachmann, Mr. Pawlenty, Mr. Johnson, and Dr. Paul in endorsing a federal Right to Work law.

“The fact is, the three first battleground states in the presidential primaries — Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina — are all home to extraordinarily vibrant, growing Right to Work movements,” Mr. Mix explained.

“All the 2012 candidates, whether they are already in the race or enter some time in the next few months, will have to take into account the large numbers of Iowans, New Hampshirites, and South Carolinians who regard Right to Work as a critical issue.

“Those who are savvy politicians, and aren’t so deep in hock to Big Labor that their freedom of action is constrained, should logically respond to the reality on the ground by coming out in favor of a national Right to Work law.”

President’s Handpicked Bureaucrats Ignore 2010 Election Results

(Source: July 2011 NRTWC Newsletter)

In the 2007-2008 and 2009-2010 Congresses, Big Labor’s top objective was a rewrite of federal labor law making it even easier for union bosses to seize monopoly-bargaining power over millions of employees in the American private sector.

Union strategists’ legislative vehicle was the cynically mislabeled “Employee Free Choice Act,” introduced by pro-forced unionism Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.). After Mr. Kennedy died in 2009, union-label Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin took over as the lead Senate sponsor.

The Miller-Kennedy-Harkin measure was more accurately called the “Card-Check” Forced-Unionism Bill.

Even without a federal card-check mandate, union bosses have long been able to acquire “exclusive” (monopoly) power to negotiate employees’ pay, benefits, and work rules solely through the acquisition of signed “union authorization cards.”

Consequently, individual workers under the peering eyes of union organizers may be intimidated into signing not just themselves, but all of their nonunion fellow employees, over to union-boss control.

However, as stacked as current law is in favor of Big Labor’s monopoly-bargaining power, employers nevertheless retain the right to stand up for their employees against union-boss intimidation tactics.

But Miller-Kennedy-Harkin would have empowered union officials to impose monopoly bargaining through card checks automatically, with no recourse for any pro-Right to Work employee or employer.

This legislation was totally contrary to the policy views of the vast majority of citizens, including union members.

Last November 2, 31 Card-Check Bill Supporters Lost Their Re-Election Bids

“Over the years, polls have shown Americans overwhelmingly oppose union monopoly bargaining, period,” explained National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“The public certainly has no interest in backing policies designed to help Big Labor grab monopoly-bargaining privileges over millions of additional workers.”

On Election Day, 2010, the American people had their say about whether Washington, D.C., should be handing union bosses more power over workers and helping funnel more forced dues into union coffers.

“Last November 2,” noted Mr. Mix, “31 House and Senate incumbents who had voted for the card-check scheme lost their re-election bids. This was about as clear an electoral repudiation as any bill ever gets.

“Unfortunately, the forced-unionism zealots who now hold all but one of the four occupied seats on the National Labor Relations Board don’t seem to have noticed.

“Despite the fact that voters in last fall’s elections sent a clear message they oppose the imposition of new federal policies to help Organized Labor increase the share of workers who are under union monopoly-bargaining control, the Obama NLRB last month unveiled its plan to achieve precisely that goal.”

‘Ambush’ Elections Would Deny Workers a Meaningful Vote

On June 22, Wilma Liebman, the ex-Teamster lawyer whom President Obama elevated to the NLRB chairmanship in 2009, and two other ex-union lawyers appointed by Mr. Obama to sit on the NLRB proposed sweeping changes to the current procedures through which Big Labor may obtain monopoly-bargaining privileges.

According to Peter Kirsanow, a former NLRB member and a Right to Work supporter, the proposed rules “would substantially shorten the time period between the filing of a petition for a union-representation election and the actual conduct of an election.”

Currently, the NLRB allows an average of 38-40 days from the time an employer is notified that a union is seeking monopoly-bargaining privileges over his or her employees to the time the workplace election occurs.

Employers often use that relatively brief period of time to make the case to their employees that unionization isn’t in their best interest.

But the “ambush” election rules proposed by the Obama NLRB would “shorten the time frame to a mere 10-20 days,” by Mr. Kirsanow’s assessment.

Mr. Mix charged: “Effectively, employees would be denied the opportunity to hear both sides of the story before voting on unionization, because employers would be denied enough time to make their case.

“The bottom-line impact of this bureaucratic sop to Big Labor would be very similar to that of the Miller-Kennedy-Harkin card-check mandate that union lobbyists tried unsuccessfully to ram through Congress from 2007 to 2010.”

Employee Phone Numbers, E-Mail Addresses Would Be Handed Over to Union Organizers

“In fact, as Mr. Kirsanow has correctly observed, the new rules would stack the deck against independent-minded employees so thoroughly that many employers would choose ‘not even to go through the expense’ of a rigged election, but ‘simply . . . recognize the union upon showing of authorization cards,’” Mr. Mix added.

In addition to effectively denying business owners and managers the opportunity to counter union organizers’ claims, the NLRB’s proposed new rules mandate that employee phone numbers and e-mail addresses be handed over to union organizers at the outset of each “ambush” election campaign.

“Current NLRB rules already seriously infringe on employees’ privacy by requiring their employers to hand over their names and physical addresses to union officials,” said Mr. Mix.

“But the new scheme would expose employees who don’t want to sign a union card or promise to vote for a union to even more intense Big Labor intimidation.

“And the new rules would also make it even more difficult for independent-minded employees and businesses to challenge election misconduct by union bosses and their henchmen.”

The NLRB’s proposed overhaul of union organizing campaign procedures wasn’t the only bad news for American employees and business owners who prefer to remain union-free to come out the week of June 19. The day before that plan went public, U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis announced through her staff a reinterpretation of the 1959 Landrum-Griffin Act.

This proposal would force employers to file federal reports whenever they seek outside help during union organizing campaigns, even if the consultants never communicate with any employees. Meanwhile, union organizers would continue to be exempt from reporting any hiring of consultants or lawyers.

In practice, the new Labor Department policy will, once it takes effect, encourage employers to capitulate to union organizing drives.

Committee President Vows to Back Legislation Thwarting New ‘Card Check’ Threat

“Thumbing their noses at the 2010 election results, President Barack Obama’s NLRB and Labor Department bureaucrats are now in the process of foisting ‘card check’ on American workplaces,” said Mr. Mix.

He vowed that the Committee would work closely with Capitol Hill allies to craft measures blocking implementation of the “card check” schemes introduced by the NLRB and the Labor Department last month.

“Enactment of legislation reining in such abuses will be a tall order in 2011 and 2012, due to the all but inevitable opposition of Big Labor Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-Nev.] and President Obama’s veto power,” Mr. Mix acknowledged.

“But it’s a battle Right to Work supporters can’t afford to pass up. Before we can make things better, we have to stop them from getting even worse.”

DANA employee Larry Getts (a NRTW provided witness) testified that he and his fellow co-workers came under attack by union operatives during a UAW Card Check campaign.  He appealed to congress to stop the NLRB’s planned quickie elections that would leave workers unable to investigate their options during an extremely short time period that will include union organizers flooding employees with lies.  

On the same day of the Ed & Workforce hearing, the National Right To Work distributed copies of David A. Bego’s The Devil At My Doorstep, a firsthand account of SEIU’s three-year attempt to organize Bego’s employees through intimidation and without allowing his employees a secret ballot election. 

National Right To Work President Mark Mix included the following explanation of the NLRB’s plans with a copy of The Devil At My Doorstep book that the National Right To Work Committee gave to members of congress:

 Hand Delivered: [room]                                                    July 7, 2011

Dear [Member of Congress Name],

            When Big Labor’s “Card Check” scheme was defeated last year, everyone knew they wouldn’t give up.

            And as expected, the second round of the fight is now being waged by pro-forced-union ism militants like Wilma Liebman and Craig Becker within the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the rest of the Obama Administration bureaucracy.

• The real goal of the NLRB’s actions against Boeing is really crystal clear; force Boeing into a “Card-Check” settlement agreement. 
• The NLRB’s recently proposed  “Ambush Election” rulemaking will allow union officials to force employers to immediately hand over employees’ personal information before even defining a bargaining unit.  The union could then use this list to begin a card-check corporate campaign and never even bother with the election. 
• The Board intends to overturn, via the “Lamons Gasket” case, what have become to be known as “DANA rights,” which guarantee employees a secret ballot, even after a union has forced their employer to accept “Card Check” unionization. 

            And the list goes on, all designed to help Big Labor force itself on workers who just want to be left alone.

            That’s why I hope you’ll read Dave Bego’s book, The Devil at My Doorstep, which provides firsthand accounts of the destruction to communities, property, and lives that is produced by Big Labor’s “Card Check” campaigns. Dave will explore the NLRB’s “Ambush Election Proposal” in his soon to be released book The Devil at Our Doorstep.

             If you would like to discuss these issues in greater depth, you can contact Greg Mourad our Vice President for Legislation.

 Sincerely,

 Mark Mix, President

This year, Right to Work proponents have scored a series of remarkable, though still mostly very tenuous, state victories over government union kingpins.

In March, Wisconsin and Ohio became the first states ever to revoke government union bosses’ privilege to get workers fired for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union after previously passing a law authorizing compulsory unionism.

The following month, Right to Work Oklahoma passed legislation denying government union bosses the legal power to force municipal officials to recognize them as public employees’ “exclusive” bargaining agents.

And now Right to Work Tennessee has achieved another milestone by effectively repealing the mislabeled “Education Professional Negotiations” Act, which authorized and promoted union monopoly-bargaining control over teachers and other K-12 public school instructional employees.

Union lobbyists rammed public school monopoly bargaining through the Tennessee Legislature in 1978. Big Labor puppet Gov. Ray Blanton (D) then eagerly signed the measure.

As a consequence of the Blanton law, educators in 92 Tennessee school systems, roughly two-thirds of all the districts in the state, are currently forced to accept union monopoly bargaining in order to keep their jobs.

The monopoly-bargaining system, now statutorily imposed on some or all state and local government employees in 36 states, hands union officials “exclusive” power to bargain over wages, benefits, and working conditions.

‘We’re Putting the Entire Education System at Risk’

Even public employees who choose not to join a union must work under contract terms negotiated by union bosses, or quit their jobs. Independent-minded employees are stripped of any freedom to negotiate with employers on their own behalf.

Of course, in Tennessee and other Right to Work states with public-school monopoly bargaining, educators are at least protected from being forced to pay tribute for Big Labor “representation” they never asked for. But that only limits the damage somewhat.

Even more than other public institutions, K-12 schools are corrupted by union monopoly control over employees. Arne Duncan, secretary of education for pro-forced unionism President Barack Obama, admitted as much in a speech delivered, of all places, at the National Education Association (NEA) teacher union’s 2009 convention in San Diego, Calif.

While he carefully avoided condemning monopolistic teacher unionism per se, Mr. Duncan bemoaned the fact that contracts blessed by union officials wielding monopoly-bargaining privileges have “produced an industrial, factory model of education that treats all teachers like interchangeable widgets.”

Mr. Duncan cited, for example, contract rules that base teachers’ pay entirely on how many years they’ve been on the job and how many years of higher education they have under their belts, regardless of what subject they studied or how well they learned it.

“School systems pay teachers billions of dollars each year for earning credentials that do very little to improve the quality of teaching,” Mr. Duncan charged.

“At the same time, many schools give nothing at all to the teachers who go the extra mile and make all the difference in students’ lives.” At another point in the speech, he warned: “[W]e are not only putting kids at risk, we’re putting the entire education system at risk.”

Asking Teacher Union Bosses to Stop Abusing Their Government-Granted Privileges Won’t Work

“Two years ago, Arne Duncan did a pretty good job of showing how teacher union monopolists are killing hopes of reform in school districts around the country,” said National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“But merely identifying the symptom is no cure for the malady. And the Obama Administration’s education ‘reform’ program blithely assumes teacher union bosses will stop abusing their government-granted privileges if ‘friends’ like Arne Duncan ask them to enough times.

“The fact is, NEA and other teacher union bosses have a vested interest in teachers being treated as ‘interchangeable widgets.’ That forces educators to rely on the union elite, rather than their own efforts, to enhance their job security and improve their pay.

“Contrary to Mr. Duncan’s view, you can’t bring about genuine reform by ‘working with’ teacher union monopolists. Instead, your first step must be to take away their monopoly privileges. And Tennessee has just taken this step.”

Under the Professional Educators Collaborative Conferencing Act of 2011, approved by the Tennessee Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Bill Haslam (R) June 1, many school boards will meet regularly with designated teacher representatives and discuss working conditions.

For the First Time in Decades, Nonunion Teachers Will Have a Voice

But in stark contrast to the current practices in the vast majority of Volunteer State school districts, no Tennessee Education Association (TEA/NEA) or other teacher union boss will in the future have a legally protected monopoly over all “employee” input in those discussions.

Instead, any educator organization, including nonunion groups opposed in principle to monopoly bargaining and forced unionism of all kinds, that receives the support of at least 15% of a school district’s instructional employees will send representatives to the discussions.

The newly enacted law also prohibits teacher union bosses (or anyone else) from using schools’ taxpayer-funded payroll-deduction systems to fund electioneering activities.

Once the Collaborative Conferencing Act takes effect, teachers who choose not to join any union will, for the first time in decades, have a voice in discussions with school districts throughout Tennessee regarding salaries, benefits, working conditions and grievances.

Mr. Mix said a large share of the credit for this very positive development is due to the roughly 46,000 National Committee members and supporters in Tennessee.

National Committee Members and Allies in Tennessee Opposed Phony ‘Compromise’ Schemes

“While Tennessee’s Capitol in Nashville is now dominated by Republicans who owe little or nothing to Big Labor, many GOP legislators, especially in the House, prefer to appease rather than confront the teacher union hierarchy,” Mr. Mix explained.

“Consequently, after a Tennessee Senate panel approved legislation [S.B.113] repealing union monopoly bargaining in public education this year, House Republican leaders publicly complained this measure was too ‘radical.’

“Republican politicians in the state House wanted instead to pass legislation merely limiting, somewhat, the scope of teacher union officials’ monopoly-bargaining privileges.

“The fact is, this would have accomplished relatively little, but not lessened the furious reaction of the teacher union hierarchy by even one whit.

“Mobilized by the National Committee, pro-Right to Work Tennesseans deluged their legislators with postcards, e-mails, and phone calls every time they heard news of a possible GOP sellout on monopoly bargaining in public education.

“Thanks to the grass-roots activism, House Republicans and Gov. Haslam ultimately went along with Senate Republicans on the core issue of education reform.

“In the future, teacher union bosses will no longer be able to cajole Tennessee school systems into granting them legal monopoly privileges, or have the legal power to force school officials to recognize them as educators’ ‘exclusive’ bargaining agents.”

But Mr. Mix cautioned that Right to Work supporters will need to monitor closely implementation of the new law once current monopolistic school contracts expire.

‘Collaborative Conferencing’ May Not Be an Ideal Solution

“Instead of eliminating monopoly bargaining simply by empowering individual teachers to negotiate with school officials on their own behalf, ‘collaborative conferencing’ continues to favor groups over individuals,” he said.

“The new Tennessee system is far preferable to what it replaces, because teachers who dissent from Big Labor ideology and policies will have the legal prerogative to select their own representative for discussions over working conditions.

“However, there is a danger that teacher union chiefs will successfully wield their political clout to intimidate school boards into circumventing the law and effectively shutting out nonunion educator groups from the ‘collaborative conferences.’

“In the coming years, National Right to Work will take every appropriate step to ensure that, under the Collaborative Conferencing Act, nonunion Tennessee educator groups truly have equal access to air their concerns with school officials, as the language of the law promises.”