Fairness Center @FairnessCenter

We filed a lawsuit on Ed’s behalf to vindicate his constitutional rights to not be forced to associate with or financially support a union. This litigation quickly forced AFSCME to accept Ed’s resignation and stop taking his money. Separately, we also helped Ed file an unfair labor practice charge to hold the union accountable for allowing the harassment from an official who remains in leadership today. “By taking legal action, I am reminding [the union] that public employees deserve to be treated with dignity and that, when push comes to shove, we will defend our rights of free speech and association," Ed says. Read more: buff.ly/Vf5tNkz

AFSCME, District Council 37’s first vice president posted a fake photo on an employee Facebook group that depicted Ed, an African American, shaking hands with a Ku Klux Klan member. The union officials also posted a threatening video, laced with expletives, saying “Gloves off. You wanna play dirty? We’re gonna play dirty.” Despite the public nature of this harassment, AFSCME officials did nothing to discipline the union vice president. So, Ed reached out to the Fairness Center for help. Read more: buff.ly/Vf5tNkz

Ed Seabron was a tow truck operator for the NYPD for 22 years, 21 of which he spent as a union member of AFSCME, District Council 37. He and his colleagues spent hours clearing the streets of NYC in the aftermath of 9/11 and various hurricanes so emergency vehicles could get through. But they never received overtime or hazard pay. Ed brought his concerns to his union leadership. Instead of fighting for a better contract, AFSCME ignored him. Frustrated that his union didn’t seem to want to fight for him and his colleagues, Ed decided to resign. But the union refused to acknowledge his resignation and continued to deduct dues from his paycheck. He finally got AFSCME’s attention after he started to explore other union representation options. Only it wasn’t the type of attention he expected.

Read more: buff.ly/UINUP32

Dr. Marie Dupont and Ann Marie Pocklembo, both New Jersey teachers, allege that the New Jersey Education Association breached its membership contract and violated conflict of interest policies by sending more than $40 million of members’ dues to a super PAC that supported the gubernatorial campaign of then-NJEA president Sean Spiller. “A handful of union insiders spent $40 million of teachers’ dues—including mine—on the union president’s political ambitions. That’s wrong, and I believe it’s illegal,” said Marie, who has since resigned her union membership in protest. “I never agreed to bankroll a politician,” added Ann Marie.

@northjersey Read more about this troubling trend @northjersey: buff.ly/a5NxtCn

“I believe union officials targeted me because I had spoken up in the past, raising concerns they didn’t want to hear," MacCarthy says. McGrath writes: "At one union meeting, he recalls objecting when union officials disclosed what he saw as confidential information in an inappropriate setting. He also vocally disagreed when, he says, union officials resisted members’ efforts to make the union’s operations more transparent." "Disagree with the union's top brass, and you may live to regret it. That’s the message MacCarthy received — and he’s not alone." Read more: buff.ly/a5NxtCn

"Across New Jersey, public workers who question union officials or exercise their rights against a union too often have found union power turned against them," Fairness Center president Nathan McGrath writes for @northjersey. "When an anonymous allegation of 'workplace discrimination' threatened his career, longtime South Jersey teacher James MacCarthy expected his union to help clear his name. Instead, the Eastampton Township Education Association facilitated the complaint against him in fall 2022 without even bothering to hear his side of the story, he alleges in his ongoing lawsuit." "The vague accusations included a complaint about the way he said 'good morning.' The teachers’ union took them as gospel. MacCarthy, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran, suspects that union officials had ulterior motives in helping his accuser."

Read more about his case here: buff.ly/PGTk0vy

John Grande won a huge victory after he filed charges against his union for refusing to represent him in a workplace grievance, securing rights for all Connecticut public employees. Now he is looking to hold Hartford school administrators accountable for the retaliatory investigation that began when he simply voiced his opinion about a mandatory DEI training. “They threatened my career to silence me, but with this lawsuit, I’m leveling the playing field and forcing school officials to answer for trampling my rights," John says.

Recently, "the department sent public-sector unions in the state a notice reminding them to follow the law, and it created an apparently new online portal for them to file the required financial reports." "My clients are pleased that the state has taken the first steps toward enforcing a law that has been on the books since the Eisenhower administration. But they are cautiously waiting to see what happens next — for example, will the state go after unions that don’t comply?" McGrath concludes: "Whether at the state or federal level, a right that depends on union officials voluntarily respecting it, or on government officials deciding it is worth their time to enforce, is not much of a right at all. Union-represented employees should know that it may be up to them to assert their rights and enforce the law when no one else will." Read more: buff.ly/QMS1MCl

"That struck a chord with my clients: state corrections officer Ryan Bilodeau and Professor Earl Ormond, both of whom are lifelong union members who wanted to find out how their unions were spending members’ money," McGrath writes. "Ormond wants to find out how much money his union is spending to prop up these controversial political campaigns, 'even if it requires the Connecticut Department of Labor to do some paperwork.' "Only after Ormond and Bilodeau sued their unions to compel them to follow the law did the agency finally start doing some of that 'paperwork.'" Read more: buff.ly/QMS1MCl

Fairness Center president Nathan McGrath writes for @TheHillOpinion: "My clients learned they cannot assume union officials will follow transparency laws, new or old, or that government officials will even enforce them." "Consider Connecticut. Since 1957, state law has required public-sector unions to file annual financial reports with the labor commissioner," he adds. "But most unions have never filed the required reports — and for years, state officials didn’t seem to care."

Judge Holden turned to the Fairness Center to file a federal lawsuit to uphold his right to free association and to initiate an enforcement action with the Attorney General to recover missing employee election records. “This case is about an unlawful employee election and unwanted union representation. Judge Holden wants the court to acknowledge that the union and the Federal Labor Relations Authority are violating his rights by forcing him to associate with a union that was unlawfully certified to represent him,” said Nathan McGrath, president and general counsel of the Fairness Center. Read more: buff.ly/kDo93Z5

In 1998, an election was held and a union was certified by the FLRA to represent this “mixed” bargaining unit. But when Judge Holden asked to see the election documents, the FLRA could not provide them. Judge Holden alleges that the FLRA either destroyed or failed to preserve key documents. Without election records, there is no evidence that a majority of professional employees voted to join the mixed unit as required by federal statute. Therefore, Judge Holden believes that the union was unlawfully certified as the representative of the professional employees and has been illegally representing professional employees for decades. Read more: buff.ly/kDo93Z5

James Holden, an administrative judge with the USDA in the Office of Hearing and Appeals, believes the union that represents him was put in place unlawfully. Judge Holden alleges that the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) broke federal statute when it certified AFSCME, Council 20 to represent his “mixed” bargaining unit that combines professional and nonprofessional employees. The Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute is clear: a union cannot represent a bargaining unit of both professional and nonprofessional employees unless a majority of just the professional employees first vote to be included in that unit with nonprofessional employees.

Since 1957, Connecticut law has required public-sector unions with 25 or more members to file annual financial reports with the state labor commissioner and make those records available to union members. In practice, however, unions subject to the statute have not filed the required reports for decades. As a result, ordinary members have no realistic way to find out how their unions are using their dues and whether basic financial safeguards are being followed. Earl's lawsuit seeks a declaration that his union violated the law and an order requiring union officials to comply with the transparency statute by filing the required financial reports. Read more: buff.ly/8zH15gG

“If our dues are being used for politics without our consent, members should at least know how much is being spent,” said Earl Ormond, a retired law enforcement officer who oversees the criminal justice program at Connecticut State Community College-Naugatuck Valley, and a member of the Congress of Connecticut Community Colleges (or 4Cs). Earl says 4Cs frequently promotes political causes that do not reflect his views and that members receive little explanation of how dues are spent. In one example, the union promoted and passed a Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions resolution that he viewed as anti-Semitic. The resolution condemned Israel for committing “genocide” and “apartheid” and for practicing “forced starvation of Palestinians.”

We filed a lawsuit against UNITE HERE to defend Tina’s First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Tina’s lawsuit demanded that UNITE HERE: - Accept her union membership resignation; - Refund the dues she paid since she first attempted to resign; - Remove the language requiring union membership or payments from union membership cards and the collective bargaining agreement. Just months later, UNITE HERE caved and agreed to all three of Tina’s terms—a victory that also protected her colleagues’ constitutional rights. Read more: buff.ly/HIWIvxr

Tina contacted UNITE HERE officials to resign her union membership, but union officials refused to accept her resignation. They also warned her that she could owe back dues if the law changed. Tina’s attempts to resign were ignored or thwarted at every turn. Then she found the Fairness Center. Read more: buff.ly/HIWIvxr

Union officials told Tina Curtis, head cook for a New Haven, Connecticut public school, that she needed to sign a new union membership form. The form stated, “All employees…as a condition of continued employment, [must] become and remain a member of the Union in good standing or pay to the Union an agency fee in recognition of services performed by the Union.” Tina signed the form under the impression that she would be out of a job if she didn’t. Later, Tina learned that the Janus decision recognized mandatory union fees as unconstitutional in the public sector. UNITE HERE was aware of the Janus ruling, but union officials willfully ignored it and continued to tell Tina and her colleagues that they were required to make union payments. Read more: buff.ly/HIWIvxr