control, never consented to union duesor fees being taken from his paychecks.However, he has been forced to payapproximately $7,143.23 in forced fees

FoundationActionFoundationAction

Vol. XXXV, No. 3 8001 Braddock Road • Springfield, Virginia 22160 www.nrtw.org May/June 2015

The bi-monthly newsletter of the National Right to Work

Legal Defense Foundation, Inc.

CHICAGO, IL – Three Illinois stateemployees have moved to intervene insupport of Governor Bruce Rauner’sfederal lawsuit challenging the constitu-tionality of union officials’ power toforce nonmember state employees topay union fees as a condition of employ-ment.

The three state employees, MarkJanus, Marie Quigley, and Brian Trygg,filed the motion to intervene in the law-suit with legal assistance from staffattorneys with the National Right toWork Foundation and the Illinois PolicyInstitute’s Liberty Justice Center.Governor Rauner has also moved toamend his lawsuit to add the employeesto the case.

Civil servants opposeforced union dues

Janus, a Child Support Specialist withthe Illinois’ Department of Healthcareand Family Services since March 2008,must accept AFSCME Council 31 unionofficials’ so-called “representation” eventhough he is not a union member andopposes the union hierarchy’s publicpolicy positions. Adding insult to injury,he has been forced to fork over an esti-mated $4,228.36 to AFSCME unionofficials even though he believes they donot act in his, or Illinois taxpayers’, bestinterests.

Quigley, who has worked for theIllinois Department of Public Health for

25 years, always refrained from unionmembership and tried to take jobs toavoid union interference. Unfortunately,every department she worked in waseventually unionized. In 2011, depart-ment management notified her that shemust accept AFSCME Council 31 unionofficials’ workplace bargaining. Sincethen, she estimates that she’s paid$1,661.44 to the AFSCME union hierar-chy, even though she disagrees with theunion’s seniority system and belives thatAFSCME union bosses have had a detri-mental impact on the state’s budget andeconomy.

Trygg, a 35 year veteran of the IllinoisDepartment of Transportation whoseposition as a civil engineer was reclassi-fied in 2009 as a unionized positionunder Teamsters Local 916 union boss

See ILLINOIS CIVIL SERVANTS page 2

Illinois Civil Servants Defend Governor’s Challenge to Forced Union DuesState employees contend compulsory union dues violate their First Amendment rights

Illinois civil servant Mark Janus (pictured in front of the state capitol) andtwo of his coworkers are fighting for civil servants’ First Amendment rights.

IN THIS ISSUE

Foundation Assists Union-Abused Workers During OilRefinery Strike

Foundation Offers Free Legal Aid to Enforce Wisconsin Right to Work Law

Foundation Files Brief inLandmark Supreme Court Case

3

4

5

6

7 Commentary: “The Union ThatWon’t Take No for an Answer”

State Troopers File Lawsuit toForce Union Bosses to Followthe Law

Photo courtesy of The Illinois Policy Institute

2 Foundation Action May/June 2015

Rev. Fred Fowler Chairman, Board of TrusteesPatrick Semmens Vice President and Editor-in-ChiefRay LaJeunesse, Jr. Vice President and Legal DirectorMark Mix President

The Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employeeswhose human or civil rights have been violated by abuses of compulsory unionism. All contributions

to the Foundation are tax deductible under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Distributed by theNational Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc.

8001 Braddock Road, Springfield, Virginia 22160www.nrtw.org • 1-800-336-3600

Foundation Action

despite never receiving any informationfrom Teamster Local 916 union officialson how the money was being spent.Trygg disagrees with the Teamsterunion bosses’ political agenda, citing hisreligious beliefs, and believes that theunion does not act in his or Illinois citi-zens’ best interests.

Citing Foundation cases,Governor halts forced dues

Governor Rauner sent shockwavesthrough the state in February when heissued an executive order that instructsall state agencies to put in escrow, pend-ing the outcome of the federal lawsuit hefiled the same day, all forced union feedeductions from nonmember stateemployees’ wages required by Illinois’public-sector labor relations statute.That statute allows union bosses tocharge nonmember public workers upto 97 percent of full union dues.

In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Courtimplied in the Foundation-won Knox v.SEIU ruling that it was ready to reassesswhether union bosses’ forced-dues pow-

ers violate civil servants’ FirstAmendment rights. Last year, in theFoundation-won Harris v. Quinn casethat originated in Illinois, the Courtstruck down compulsory union fees forhomecare providers who receive statesubsidies based on their clientele. InHarris, a majority of the Court charac-

terized public-sector union officials’forced-dues powers as “questionable onseveral grounds.”

Governor Rauner’s companion law-suit seeks to apply the Court’s reasoningin Knox and Harris to free all Illinoisstate employees from compulsory unionfees. Rauner asked the court to declareunconstitutional the provisions of statecollective bargaining agreements thatrequire nonmember state employees topay union dues, a judgment that wouldeffectively grant those workers, includ-ing Janus, Quigley, and Trygg, Right toWork protections.

Motion improves chancesof legal victory

Union lawyers and pro-forced union-ism Democrat Attorney General LisaMadigan swooped in and demandedthat the court dismiss Rauner’s lawsuitshortly after it was filed, arguing thatRauner lacks legal standing because heis personally not forced to pay uniondues or fees.

Rauner’s attempt to end forcedunionism for Illinois civil servants wasgreatly bolstered by the motion to inter-vene filed for the three state employeesby Foundation staff attorneys. Thesecivil servants clearly have standing todefend Rauner’s reforms because they’vebeen forced to pay thousands of dollarsto government union officials withwhom they want nothing to do.

“We applaud these public servants fordefending their First Amendment rightto not subsidize union officials’ politicalagenda,” said Mark Mix, president of theNational Right to Work Legal DefenseFoundation. “Governor Rauner’s actionsmay finally give Illinois civil servantsthe Right to Work protections theydeserve, which is why Foundaton attor-neys are supporting his efforts.”

Illinois Civil Servants, Governor Challenge Public Sector Forced Duescontinued from page 1

Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner’sexecutive order and accompanyinglawsuit would ensure that all Illinoispublic employees get Right to Workprotections.

Right to Work laws in the legal arena.The National Right to Work Foundationhas been at the forefront of efforts topreserve Indiana’s and Michigan’srecently-enacted Right to Work lawsfrom Big Labor counter-attacks in stateand federal court.

In Michigan, Foundation staff attor-neys are currently helping more than 30employees defend or enforce their state’snew Right to Work laws in cases beforethe Michigan Employee RelationsCommission and federal court.

In Indiana, Foundation litigatorsstepped forward to help Hoosier work-ers defend their Right to Work from alawsuit filed in state court byInternational Union of OperatingEngineers lawyers. Foundation attor-neys have also helped several Indianaemployees assert their rights andenforce the law at the state level.

Foundation attorneys are nostrangers to Wisconsin, either.Governor Scott Walker’s public-sectorunion reforms, commonly referred to as“Act 10,” were important precursors toWisconsin’s full Right to Work law andprompted several union legal counter-attacks. Once again, Foundation staffattorneys were there in state and federalcourt to defend the law from Big Labor.

“We’ve had plenty of practice defend-ing state Right to Work laws in court,”said Semmens. “But that’s a good thing,because it means that more state Rightto Work laws are getting passed, andfewer workers are being forced to payunion dues just to get or keep a job.”

May/June 2015 Foundation Action 3

Foundation Offers Free Legal Aid to Enforce Wisconsin Right to Work LawRight to Work task force prepares to defend Badger State reforms in courtWASHINGTON, DC – Hours afterWisconsin became the 25th Right toWork state, the National Right to WorkFoundation announced an offer of freelegal aid to any Wisconsin workers seek-ing to assert their rights under the state’snew law. The Foundation has alsoassembled a task force of experiencedstaff attorneys to defend the Right toWork law from any union challenges instate and federal court.

“Although the constitutionality ofstate Right to Work laws has long beenupheld, Big Labor is undoubtedly plan-ning a desperate rearguard action in thecourts to hamstring implementation oreven overturn the law,” said PatrickSemmens, vice president of the NationalRight to Work Foundation. “In fact, ittook only a day for union lawyers to filethe first anti-Right to Work lawsuit instate court.”

Right to Work attorneysprepare to defend reforms

Foundation staff attorneys plan torespond to that lawsuit by filing an ami-cus curiae (‘friend of the court’) brief onbehalf of several Wisconsin employeeswho wish to defend their newly-enshrined Right to Work. The anti-Right to Work lawsuit was filed in DaneCounty Circuit Court by lawyers fromseveral Wisconsin unions, including aUnited Steel Workers local and theWisconsin branch of the AFL-CIO.

In that suit, union lawyers are makingthe same arguments that were rejectedby Indiana courts, claiming that becausethe Right to Work law allows workers toopt out of financially supporting aunion, the law compels unions to repre-sent nonunion workers without “justcompensation” - i.e. compulsory dues.

“This spurious lawsuit ignores thefact that union officials have always had

the option to only bargain for dues-pay-ing union members, even though theyprefer to require all workers to accepttheir monopoly bargaining,” saidSemmens. “The Indiana Supreme Courtrejected similar arguments made byunion lawyers last year, and we’re confi-dent that this legal challenge won’t fareany better.”

Meanwhile, dozens of Wisconsinemployees have already responded tothe Foundation’s offer of free legal assis-tance to assert their Right to Work.Foundation attorneys are in the processof evaluating each request to determinehow best to enforce employee rights inthe Badger State.

Foundation has a perfectlegal track record

Fortunately for Wisconsin employ-ees, Foundation staff attorneys haveplenty of experience defending state

Governor Scott Walker’s Right toWork reforms must be vigorouslydefended in court if Wisconsinemployees are to benefit from thenew laws.

For breaking newsand other Right toWork updates, visit

www.nrtw.org

4 Foundation Action May/June 2015

abandon their jobs. Further, union offi-cials allowed the union’s website andFacebook page to be used to communi-cate threats against workers who contin-ued to work during the strike.

Smith, who originally found theFoundation through the Internet, calledRight to Work staff attorneys for assis-tance.

With free legal assistance fromFoundation staff attorneys, Smith filedan unfair labor practice charge againstthe UAW Local 13-1 union with theNational Labor Relations Board(NLRB). Meanwhile, the Foundation’sLegal Information Departmentarranged for Smith to meet with areporter with The Houston Chronicle fora story on his case.

Within days after the article was pub-lished, three employees at the nearbyLyondellBasell Industries oil refineryfiled similar charges against USW Local13-227 union officials. Those chargesallege that union bosses there alsoresorted to harassing, coercing, andthreatening workers for refusing toabandon their jobs.

HOUSTON, TX – Shell oil refineryworker Joseph Smith’s father was aunion man. In fact, his father, a KoreanWar veteran who later became a GeneralMotors parts department worker inPennsylvania, was a United AutoWorkers union member for 41 years,including 21 as a union official.

“There were three strikes when I wasa kid,” remembers Smith, who now livesin Friendswood, Texas.

That’s why he wanted to change hislocal United Steelworker (USW) unionfor the better.

“I was a union official here for sixyears,” Smith said. “However, there wasa lack of representation across theboard. I saw corruption. They would actlike a street gang. They would createimaginary fights to make it look likethey were doing something.

“They attacked people’s character tokeep their elite status,” he added. “Theynever did anything to relinquish theirpower over the people.”

“That’s all they do, they bully people.If you are such a great organization, whydo you gotta force people to pay ya? Itried to change the mentality.”

Despite his best efforts, the union wasbeyond repair. And after enduringharassment in the workplace, including22 trips to Human Resources to addressfalse allegations, an exasperated Smithresigned his union membership.

Foundation offers legal aid

Then early this year, USW unionbosses instigated a highly-publicized,months-long strike against oil refineriesacross America. The National Right toWork Foundation responded by issuinga special legal notice to affected workerswhich laid out their rights under federallabor law and gave them a place to turnfor advice or legal assistance.

At Smith’s plant in Deer Park, rough-ly 150 of the approximately 800-largeworkforce continued to work during thestrike, with many resigning their mem-bership in the USW Local 13-1 union, asis their right under federal labor law andTexas’ popular Right to Work law.

“Shell Company is an awesome com-pany to work for,” Smith said. “There arelots of training on safety. A group of usagreed to work during strike. We want-ed to provide for our families.”

As the stream of workers resigningunion membership and returning towork grew every day, it was reportedthat USW Local 13-1 union officialsturned off their fax machine in anattempt to stop workers from exercisingtheir right to resign and return to work.

Workers file chargesagainst union retaliation

In response to the mass exodus ofmembers, USW Local 13-1 union offi-cials resorted to harassing, coercing, andthreatening workers for refusing to

Joe Smith (left) and two of his coworkers publicly shared their stories ofunion intimidation during a USW strike, prompting a wave of workers to exer-cise their rights to leave the union.

Foundation Assists Union-Abused Workers During Oil Refinery StrikeUnion officials threatened workers who refused to abandon their jobs

Photo courtesy of The Houston Chronicle

The workers alleged that over thecourse of several meetings, USW Local13-227 union officials threatened work-ers who continued to work during thestrike with job termination and otherretaliation. Further, Local 13-227 unionofficials and others with access to theunion’s Facebook pages used the pagesto threaten workers who continued towork during the strike, and employeeswho contemplated returning to work.

Then a week later, three moreLyondellBasell employees came forwardand filed similar charges.

“USW union bosses tried to punishworkers who stayed on the job to pro-vide for their families,” said Mark Mix,president of National Right to Work. “Itis indefensible that workers whoresigned their union membership andcontinued to work to support their fam-ilies in defiance of the USW boss-ordered strike were harassed and threat-ened for exercising their rights.”

Workplace freedomempowers employees

“The newspaper article helped get theword out,” said Smith. “I’m a veteran, Ifought for our rights. While it started [atthe Deer Park refinery], the Right toWork [message] spread to other oilrefinery sites like wildfire.”

“More people are professing Right toWork than I have ever seen. All it tookwas the simple step of getting people tounderstand they have a right to choose.”

By the end of the strike, almost 200people returned to work. And as work-ers now return to work at the Deer Parkfacility, they are finding a new work-place culture.

“Shell is now no longer allowing theunion to bully people,” Smith reports.“We are such a large group, they can’tdiscriminate against us. We no longerfeel that we’re alone. We’re not going totake any abuse, not going to let thembully us anymore. This is our house. Wefeel like we belong here.”

May/June 2015 Foundation Action 5

WASHINGTON, DC – This March,National Right to Work Foundationstaff attorneys filed a brief with the U.S.Supreme Court urging the nine justicesto hear a challenge to public-sectorunion officials’ power to force civil ser-vants to pay union dues as a condition ofemployment. Foundation attorneys filedthe amicus curiae (‘friend of the court’)brief in Friedrichs v. California TeachersAssociation, a lawsuit brought by tenCalifornia public school teachers sup-ported by the Center for IndividualRights.

Nearly 40 years ago, the Court ruledin the Foundation-won Abood v. DetroitBoard of Education that public-sectorworkers can be compelled to pay uniondues as a condition of employment, buthave a constitutional right to opt out ofdues for politics or any other activitiesunrelated to workplace bargaining.Since then, National Right to WorkFoundation-assisted workers haverepeatedly asked the courts to end gov-ernment union officials’ power to forcepublic employees to pay any union duesat all.

“For decades, Foundation litigatorshave challenged the legitimacy of forc-ing nonunion civil servants to pay uniondues,” said Ray LaJeunesse, vice presi-dent and legal director of the NationalRight to Work Foundation. “It’s been along fight, but the Supreme Court hassuggested that it’s finally ready to endforced unionism in the public sector.”

Foundation wins laidlegal groundwork

In Knox v. SEIU, a 2012 ruling won byFoundation staff attorneys, the SupremeCourt hinted that it was ready toreassess whether union officials' forced-dues powers, which Justice Alito labeled“something of an anomaly” in his

majority opinion, violate workers’ FirstAmendment rights. Responding to thatline of reasoning, Foundation litigatorshave helped several workers file casesthat challenge the legal legitimacy ofpublic-sector union officials’ forced-dues powers.

In Harris v. Quinn, anotherFoundation Supreme Court victoryfrom last year, the Court ruled that indi-viduals who receive state subsidiesbased on their clientele cannot be forcedto pay union dues. Harris, a class-actionlawsuit filed by several Foundation-assisted Illinois homecare providers,renders unconstitutional similar home-care unionization schemes in at least 13other states, freeing roughly 500,000providers from forced union duesnationwide. Moreover, the Court’sHarris decision criticized Abood'sallowance of any forced fees for publicemployees as “questionable on severalgrounds.”

“The National Right to WorkFoundation’s strategic litigation pro-

Foundation attorneys recently filed abrief in a new Supreme Court casethat could permanently end publicsector forced unionism.

Foundation Files Brief in Landmark Supreme Court CaseNew case could end all forced dues for government employees

See HIGH COURT SHOWDOWN page 8

6 Foundation Action May/June 2015

Foundation AAccttiioonn. “Several of myneighbors read it before I could cleanthe mess.”

Troopers’ lawsuit seeks toreclaim forced dues

In November 2014, Connecticut statetroopers Joseph Mercer, Carson Konow,and Collin Konow also resigned theirCSPU memberships. Despite these offi-cers’ requests that union officialsacknowledge their rights and providethem with the requisite financial break-down of union expenditures, union offi-cials refused to comply with the Hudsondisclosure rules and continued to seizefull union dues from all three troopers’paychecks.

With their lawsuit, the four troopersseek refunds for all illegally-seizedforced dues taken from their paychecksand an injunction against future collec-tion of any dues or fees until union offi-cials fulfill their disclosure require-ments.

“We’re trying to get the union to obeythe law,” Lamberty told The Daily Caller.

“We stepped in to help Mr. Lambertyand his fellow officers reclaim at leastsome of their hard-earned money,” saidPatrick Semmens, vice president of theNational Right to Work Foundation.

“National Right to Work has beengreat to work with. I know my case is ingood hands,” Lamberty later toldFoundation AAccttiioonn.

“CSPU officials are violating therights of rank-and-file state troopers,who protect Connecticut citizens on adaily basis, to keep their forced-duesgravy train going,” continued Semmens.“We applaud these troopers for standingup for their rights, but this type of abusewill continue until Connecticut passes aRight to Work law, making union duesand membership voluntary.”

HARTFORD, CT – With free legal assis-tance from the National Right to WorkFoundation, four Connecticut statetroopers filed a federal lawsuit againstthe Connecticut State Police Union(CSPU) and certain state officials forviolating their rights and refusing to fol-low federal disclosure requirements.

Connecticut state trooper MarcLamberty of Hartford County is a 20-year veteran and a union member forover 16 of those years. He resigned fromformal union membership in CSPU inJune 2011 and invoked his right torefrain from paying full union duessoon thereafter.

“I didn’t agree with the rhetoric com-ing from union leadership at the time,”said Lamberty, who was a union stewardtwice and a district representative once.“It was a decision that was a long timecoming and based on observations ofhow the union handled itself.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has longheld that civil servants have the uncon-ditional right to refrain from unionmembership at any time. However,because Connecticut does not have aRight to Work law, union officials cancompel nonmember state troopers toaccept union officials’ monopoly bar-gaining “representation,” and to payunion fees for that so-called representa-tion, as a condition of employment.

Troopers challenge unionbosses’ scofflaw tactics

The Supreme Court ruled in theFoundation’s Chicago Teachers Union v.Hudson victory that union officials mustprovide nonmember public employeeswith an independently-audited break-down of all forced-dues expenditures, aswell as the opportunity to object andchallenge the amount of forced unionfees they have to contribute before an

impartial decision-maker. These mini-mal safeguards are supposed to ensurethat workers have an opportunity torefrain from paying for union politicalactivities and member-only events, butunion officials often ignore or skimp onthese requirements.

Even though CSPU union officialsfailed to provide adequate disclosure toLamberty, state officials continued todeduct - and union officials continuedto receive - full union dues from his pay-checks, a figure totalling just over $700annually, the same amount paid by fullunion members.

Moreover, union officials never actu-ally provided Lamberty with adequatedisclosure about their expenditures. Hedid receive grief from at least one unionmilitant, however.

“I don’t have any personal issues withthe union,” he noted to The Daily Caller.“I have been harassed by one particularofficer.”

“There’s a coward trooper who lit-tered 1/4 mile of my road with a printedsmear campaign against me,” he told

Union bosses illegally confiscateddues from several Connecticut statetroopers and failed to follow federaldisclosure requirements.

State Troopers File Lawsuit to Force Union Officials to Follow the Law Union bosses refuse to comply with Foundation-won protections for workers

The Union That Won’t Take No for an Answer

May/June 2015 Foundation Action 7

By Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work LegalDefense Foundation

In 1908, following his third unsuccessful bid for the presiden-cy, William Jennings Bryan told the story of a Texas drunkwho tries to get into a bar. The first time the drunk comesthrough the door, he is quickly escorted out. The second time,he’s roughly hustled away. The third time, he’s tossed outonto the street. Before he finally goes on his way, he remarks,“I guess they don’t want me in there.”

The old drunk evidently had better social graces thanUnited Autoworkers (UAW) union officials, who are fightingtooth and nail to hold onto their monopoly bargaining privi-leges at an NTN-Bower plant in Hamilton, Ala. The UAWbosses are simply refusing to relinquish power, despite losingthree of the past four decertification elections, including themost recent one.

The third election, which the union nominally won, was soclearly tainted by ballot stuffing that the National LaborRelations Board (NLRB) had no choice but to hold anothervote. The NLRB counted 148 ballots after that third election.The problem? There were only 140 eligible employees.

Yet NTN-Bower employees are still stuck with the UAWbecause union lawyers convinced the NLRB to invalidate thefirst two elections. Following its latest defeat — by the largestmargin of the four — the UAW is again asking the board tothrow out the results.

Why are the workers so keen to get rid of the union?According to NTN-Bower employee Ginger Estes, UAWoperatives targeted workers who stayed on the job during aunion-instigated strike in 2007. Estes says that union goonsyelled racial slurs, threats, and insults at employees who con-tinued working and vandalized their cars. She also believesthat UAW supporters poisoned two of her dogs.

The UAW has been the exclusive bargaining agent forNTN-Bower employees since 1976. This means that unionofficials are empowered to negotiate wages and working con-ditions for all workers at the plant, even those who are notmembers of the union. Under federal labor law, the UAWretains these privileges in perpetuity, even if none of theplant’s current employees are part of the group that decided tobring in the UAW four decades ago.

If Alabama did not have a right-to-work law, the situationwould be even worse. Union officials in non–right-to-workstates are legally entitled to collect dues or fees from every

employee in a bargaining unit, including those who opposethe union’s presence.

Estes and her co-workers are now receiving free legal assis-tance from National Right to Work staff attorneys, who inter-vened to help them defend their decision to oust the UAW.While you might think that this is an extraordinary case, infact it is part of a broader problem.

Once a union is established in a workplace, it is almostimpossible to dislodge. The reverse, however, is not true.President Obama’s NLRB is doing everything it can to makeit easier for union officials to organize workplaces.Meanwhile, union lawyers are able to take advantage of theboard’s one-sided policies to obstruct, delay, and even nullifydecertification elections.

Under a bevy of recently enacted rules, Obama’s NLRBhas implemented so-called “ambush elections,” which dra-matically shorten the amount of time workers have to consid-er the pros and cons of unionization. Furthermore, under thenew procedures, employers are required to hand over worker-s’ personal contact information — including cell-phone num-bers, e-mails, and home addresses — to union operatives.These new rules are an open invitation for aggressive organ-izers to harass, intimidate, and coerce employees until theyagree to support unionization.

Employees with misgivings about a unionization drivecan’t postpone or block the process. But union lawyers havebecome very adept at using the NLRB’s legal toolkit to stymieor indefinitely delay workers’ attempts to eject an unwantedunion.

In his recent congressional testimony, veteran Right toWork attorney Glenn Taubman noted that many unions haveresorted to blocking charges — that is, federal charges filedwith the NLRB to delay or block elections — in order to“game the system and delay decertification elections foryears.” When the elections are finally held, however, “theunions lost overwhelmingly.”

The facts are clear: In both certification and decertificationelections, the board has dramatically tilted the playing fieldtoward union operatives, at the expense of workers’ rights.The NLRB would do well to remember that its job is to serveas neutral arbiter of American labor law, not a cheerleader forBig Labor’s organizing campaigns.

This piece originally appeared in National Review Onlineon April 11, 2015.

NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK FEATURED COMMENTARY

gram built the legal basis for this newchallenge to government-imposedforced dues for public employees,” con-tinued LaJeunesse. “The brief we filedurging the Supreme Court to take thecase brings our unique experience tobear on this critical issue and shows howthe current system of forced fees forsupposedly non-political union expen-ditures can never adequately protectcivil servants’ First Amendment rights.”

Fight against forced duesadvances on other fronts

Foundation staff attorneys are alsohelping nine airline employees sue theTransport Workers Union of America toestablish railroad and airway workers’right to refrain from paying any uniondues or fees. In December 2014, a feder-al district court judge granted the caseclass-action status. Underscoring thecase’s significance, the Department ofJustice then intervened to defend theconstitutionality of forced union fees.

In their Friedrichs brief, Foundationattorneys explain why the Court shouldtake the case and strike down unionofficials’ forced-dues powers. The briefnotes that bargaining over wages andworking conditions in the public sectoris an inherently political activity, touch-ing on a variety of ideological issuesrelated to the size and scope of govern-ment. Consequently, forcing nonunionemployees to pay union dues violatestheir First Amendment rights to freeexpression.

“Union bosses have abused theirpower to compel workers to pay uniondues for far too long,” said LaJeunesse. “The First Amendment right of workerswho refrain from union membership toalso refrain from paying any union duesat all, especially for politics, is long over-due.”

Dear Foundation Supporter:

The past few years have been an exciting time for supporters of worker free-dom.

When Indiana passed the country’s 23rd Right to Work law in 2012, it had beenover a decade since Oklahoma became the 22nd state to reject forced dues andprotect individual worker choice.

Following Indiana’s lead, Michigan also passed Right to Work protections forits citizens in 2012. And now Wisconsin has joined their ranks this year bybecoming the 25th Right to Work state.

This has the Big Labor bosses raving mad. The response has been entirely pre-dictable.

Any time a state ends union bosses’ forced dues powers, the first thing unionlawyers do is run to the courts and attempt to overturn, or at least delay enforce-ment of, the Right to Work law.

Union officials’ second ploy is to use their monopoly bargaining power toextend forced dues contracts as long as possible or set up bureaucratic rules tomake it difficult for workers to exercise their rights under the new Right to Worklaw.

Fortunately, your Foundation is always ready to defend Right to Work lawsagainst baseless union legal challenges, and to help workers exercise their right toend all financial support for an unwanted union using their new legal protections.

In Indiana and Michigan we have already done both, with great success. NowFoundation staff attorneys are doing the same for Wisconsin employees.

As the only nationwide legal organization dedicated to combatting compulso-ry unionism in the courts, defending and enforcing state Right to Work laws isone of the most critical missions the National Right to Work Foundation under-takes.

Thanks to your continued support, we are able to do this vital work as work-place freedom continues to spread.

Sincerely,

Mark Mix

8 Foundation Action May/June 2015

Message from Mark Mix

PresidentNational Right to WorkLegal Defense Foundation

High Court Showdowncontinued from page 5