SUIT ALLEGES FERGUSON, UNIONS COLLUDED [5] CAMPAIGN FINANCE CASE CAN CONTINUE [5] COUNT Y EMPLOYEE DOING UNION BUSINESS [9]
LIVINGLIBERTY A PUBLICATION OF THE FREEDOM FOUNDATION | APRIL 2019
Melissa Unger
Will lie for dues!
CASH-STRAPPED SEIU 503 PUTS ITS LONG-TIME HOME ON THE MARKET
Electronic Service Requested
Freedom Foundation PO Box 552 Olympia, WA 98507
T
here’s no disputing SEIU 503 has been squarely in the Freedom Foundation’s crosshairs since the organization expanded into Oregon in 2015. The two combatants offered starkly different accounts, however, about how much damage had been inflicted. The question was answered definitively during March when a “For Sale” sign went up out front of the headquarters building in Salem the union has called home for more than 20 years. After spending millions during the 2018 election cycle while simultaneously losing millions in membership dues, SEIU 503 was forced to vacate a building worth almost $3 million. Sources inside the union report its leaders are currently in the process of purchasing a new building in Salem. But SEIU 503 only plans to occupy one floor of the structure. The rest of the space would be sublet to a paying tenant. This is how SEIU 503 is attempting to deal with its devastating membership losses — by taking in boarders. What’s next? Mowing lawns? A bake sale? More seriously, the other floor’s current tenant is the state of Oregon. Will taxpayers still be paying at the same rate when their landlord is SEIU 503, or will the state find itself funneling even more money into the union’s coffers in the form
By BOAZ DILLON, Labor Policy Analyst
of higher rent? The Freedom Foundation has launched an investigation to look into this shady transaction and will hold union leaders accountable if any laws are being broken. When the Freedom Foundation came to town four years ago, it immediately launched a full-scale messaging campaign to once-forcibly-unionized home healthcare providers who had recently been freed by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Harris v. Quinn. The ruling characterized SEIU’s dues-skimming operation as a “scheme” and, to date, the Freedom Foundation has helped more than 40 percent of SEIU 503-represented care providers come to the same conclusion. By our calculations, their defections are costing the union more than $540,000 a month in lost revenue. And the total just keeps getting larger. But the real body blow came on June 27, 2018, when the U.S. Supreme Court in Janus v. AFSCME recognized the optout rights of all public employees. The Freedom Foundation responded by dramatically expanding its campaign messaging to the wider audience. The combination of door-to-door canvassing, mailers, emails, billboards and TV and radio ads has caused SEIU 503 to experience a 26 percent drop in membership just eight months after Janus, blowing an estimated $8.7 million-a-year hole in it finances. These cataclysmic losses of revenue and membership expose the grim reality faced by SEIU 503 and the state’s other government employee unions – which exSee MOVING Page 10
VOLUME 30 | ISSUE 4
[2]
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A PUBLI CAT I ON OF T HE FREED OM FOU NDATION
CONTENTS
Our mission is to advance individual liberty, free enterprise, and limited, accountable government.
PAGE 4
PAGE 3
THE CASE FOR FREEDOM
LEADERSHIP MEMO Publisher: Tom McCabe Editor: Jeff Rhodes
CONTACT Freedom Foundation PO Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507
(360) 956-3482 FreedomFoundation.com
“Quote”
By BOB WICKERS Reprinted from FOX NEWS Harris a Longtime Union Ally - And Here’s Why That Should Concern Voters.
By TOM McCABE Once, Unions Recognized the Threat of Socialism; Nowadays, They Revel in It
PAGE 5
LITIGATING FREEDOM By BILL McMORRIS Reprinted from the WASHINGTON FREE BEACON Suit: Washington’s AG Ferguson Allegedly Conspired with Unions.
What They Said & What They Meant
Reprinted from RED STATE Campaign Finance Suit Can Proceed.
PAGES 6-7
~ of the month ~
Making Noise
The media has a field day as the Freedom Foundation holds a press conference to announce its plans to sue the California Teachers Association.
SOME
PAGE 8
OREGON UPDATE
By AARON WITHE How Else Would Unions Respond to Failure? By BOAZ DILLON
“The real evil, from our point of view, is our clients being whack-jacked into supporting union politics in exchange for having a voice in what I think most employees would consider to be one of the most important aspects of their life.” BRUCE N. CAMERON
Attorney representing a group of Massachusetts teachers challenging a law that forbids non-union members from voting on contracts or otherwise participating in union decisions.
HB 2016: The Unions’ Latest Love Note to Themselves
PAGE 9
BEST OF THE BLOG By SAMUEL COLEMAN County Employee Doing Union Business on the Public’s Dime. By JEFF RHODES New Attorney Gets Her First Dose of SEIU’s Rope-a-Dope Tactics. Freedom Foundation’s Friends, Foes Weigh in On Our Actions.
the74million.org n March 5, 2019
Nothing in this publication should be construed as an attempt to aid or hinder the election of any elected official or candidate.
PAGE 10 FREEDOM IN ACTION
By ASHLEY VARNER AOC’s Green Scheme A-OK with Her Union Cronies.
PAGE 11
FREEDOM IN THE NEWS
PAGE 12 By JAMI LUND Schools Don’t Need Another Property Tax Hike.
ACTION TIMELINE
|
A PUBLI CATION OF THE FREED OM FOU NDATION
3
ONCE, UNIONS RECOGNIZED THE THREAT OF SOCIALISM;
NOWADAYS, THEY REVEL IN IT
T
hroughout most of this nation’s history, the labor movement provided a balance to the worst intincts of liberal politicians. The looniest of the loony left — tree-huggers, socialists, gun-grabbers, etc. — have always sought to push the Democratic Party farther to the extreme. But union leaders like George Meany and Lane Kirkland respected and supported capitalism and the private sector. And for good reason. They understood their members’ wages and benefits depended on the profits earned by the businesses for which they worked. These days, however, the party is dominated by “leaders” whose indifference to — or ignorance of — the laws of economics is surpassed only by their appetite for the wealth others have earned. And they, in turn, are increasingly beholden to the country’s public-sector unions, whose manifest greed and irresponsibility make them the perfect ally. As a story on page 4 of this newsletter documents, Califnornia Sen. Kamala Harris has already accepted more than a quarter of a million dollars from government employee unions and, more recently, named disgraced former SEIU 2015 President Laphonza Butler to her inner circle of advisers. Make that handlers. Likewise, an article on page 10 explains how New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s much-ballyhooed “Green New Deal” is literally a gift-wrapped, year-round Christmas present for her union enablers. Her manifesto openly promises to “create high-quality union jobs” while “strengthening and protecting the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment.” And if she’s willing to admit that much, just imagine how many paybacks she isn’t telling you about. Without exception, each of the announced candidates for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination has embraced — whether they acknowledge it or not — socialism and the necessity of growing government. And not coincidentally, the unions that control its purse strings. Again, this is a new phenomenon. Until fairly recently, organized labor as a whole was not only supportive but actually protective of apitalism. That’s because for most of the America’s history, unions were the exclusive province of the private sector. Consequently, labor leaders had a vested interest in making sure the companies that employed their members enjoyed as much success as possible. And since it was clear to anyone with functioning brain cells that free markets promoted far more economic growth than anything ever devised, alternative concepts like socialism were considered a direct threat to the goose laying the golden eggs. But as government regulators increasingly assumed the functions once performed only by unions, organized labor
became less and less relevant, until union membership dropped to By TOM McCABE, CEO about 15 percent of the nation’s workforce. That’s when labor leaders recognized the money-making potential of the public sector. As recently as the 1930s, liberal icon Franklin Roosevelt made clear that public employees were fundamentally unlike their peers in the private sector and openly opposed the idea of government unions. It wasn’t until the Kennedy administration 30 years later that federal workers were organized. Nowadays, however, public-sector unions are the centerpiece of the entire labor movement, and socialism would only enhance their strength. At its core, socialism requires transferring the means of production from private hands to central planners in government. And as government grows, more and more public employees are ensnared by the union — especially since, until just this past year, they had no say in the matter. For decades, socialism was little more than a punchline for most Americans. But even as the left worked tirelessly to eliminate the nation’s moral and ethical compasss, unions simultaneously infiltrated and eventually came to dominate the decision-making apparatus of government. Now those chickens have come home to roost. Socialism would undoubtedly have the same effect in this country it’s having in Venezuela of destroying the private sector businesses that produce the wealth societies need to survive. Modern labor leaders almost certainly understand this. But unlike their more responsible predecessors, they couldn’t care less about what’s good for the economy as a whole. All they care about is lining their pockets with someone else’s money. Unions have been the singular focus of the Freedom Foundation for the past five years because they present the single greatest obstacle to this organization’s stated goals of free markets and limited, accountable government. Socialism isn’t a separate battle for us. It’s all the same because socialism has become the weapon they wield to obtain power. The fight against unions is also a fight against socialism and the threat it represents. It’s the Freedom Foundation’s fight and, with your steadfast support, it’s one we mean to win.
LEADERSHIP
MEMO
LIVING LIBERTY
“
The fight against unions is also a fight against socialism and the threat it represents.
”
D O S O M E T H I N G F O R F R E E D O M T O D AY
SUPPORT THE FIGHT!
The Freedom Foundation is the only organization on the West Coast that
takes on the hard fights. Every day we stand up to ensure freedom for future generations. Every gift is an investment in the future.
CALL (360) 856-3482, OR VISIT WWW.FREEDOM FOUNDATION.COM
4
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A P U BL IC AT I ON OF T HE FREEDOM FOUNDAT I ON
THE CASE FOR FREEDOM HARRIS A LONGTIME ALLY OF GOVERNMENT UNIONS - AND HERE’S WHY THAT SHOULD WORRY VOTERS Reprinted from FOX NEWS FEB. 14, 2019
A
s the long 2020 presidential campaign begins, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., has emerged as an early frontrunner for a restless Democratic Party. Harris’ political smarts, California base, and commonsense style make her a serious contender. Even the man she seeks to replace, President Trump, conceded her recent rollout was the “best opening.” But Harris’ rapid ascent wasn’t without help. She enjoyed the hefty backing from a range of financiers, raising questions about who and what she owes to those who bankrolled her political career. In true progressive fashion, Harris can rattle off talking points about politicians beholden to corporations, but her record reveals a special interest of her own: labor unions. Harris’ relationship with big donors came to a head in an uncomfortable exchange at a California town last year when an activist asked Harris if she would accept corporate political action committee (PAC) donations. Harris stumbled. “Well, that depends,” she said. “Wrong answer,” the man shot back in an exchange that went viral. Desperate to repair this political wound, Harris pledged a few weeks later to refuse corporate PAC money. “Money has now really tipped the balance between an individual having equal power in an
By BOB WICKERS, VP for OPERATIONS
election to a corporation,” Harris told the popular New York City radio show “The Breakfast Club.” Progressives praised the decision and other candidates on the left have followed suit. A casual political observer might think the issue was laid to rest, but Harris cannot erase her connections to powerful government unions. They stretch back over many years, dating back to her days as a California prosecutor. The Freedom Foundation – a national nonprofit organization that helps public employees break free from forced unionization and stand up to government unions and the worst elements of California’s big labor lobby – has seen firsthand the economic and budgetary damage politicians can do when beholden to a union’s fat campaign checks. And Harris is beholden. The senator is a longtime ally of government unions. That should come as no surprise, since she has taken more than a quarter of a million dollars in campaign contributions from labor in her career. Just in the opening stage of her campaign, Harris’ inner circle has a D.C. swamp-style connection to her former labor backers, namely former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) President Laphonza Butler. In October Butler announced she would end her 10-year stint
as the leader of California’s largest union, just in time to serve as a top consultant for Harris’ presidential campaign – hardly a coincidence. Sadly, government unions have wreaked havoc in California. They organized teacher strikes that have hurt students’ learning opportunities. They forced employees to pay unwanted dues out of their hard-earned paychecks. They cut backroom deals with corrupt politicians – whose political campaigns they fund – to maintain the failed status quo. Finally, unions in California suffered a major blow with the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in the case of Janus v. AFSCME last June. In that case, the high court decided public employees could opt out of paying union dues. The decision rattled the entrenched special interests – and politicians like Kamala Harris – that depend on the mandatory
contributions to line their own pockets. Since the Janus ruling, the Freedom Foundation launched a grassroots campaign of digital, mail and door-to-door outreach informing workers of their constitutional right to leave their union. When public employees learn they have the freedom to leave their government union, they don’t hesitate. Thus far, as a result of the Freedom Foundation’s outreach efforts, more than 40,000 have said goodbye to their union in just the seven months since the Janus decision – costing unions over $45 million a year in lost dues. That exodus of money and membership threatens the future of government unions; therefore you can be sure that finding ways to use the federal government to thwart the Janus decision and keep public employees in the dark will be at the top of government unions’ wish list when they meet with leaders like Harris. Americans should wise up that a career politician like Kamala Harris can’t simply wipe her hands of old allegiances. Her memory certainly isn’t that short — and neither is that of her government union backers.
-------------------- QUICK TAKES -----------------Stonier’s union protection bill a payoff pure and simple In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Janus decision, union-backed legislators in the Washington State House of Representatives are desperate to protect their government union patrons from any potential legal liability. Sponsored by Representative and WEA member Monica Stonier (D-Vancouver), HB 1575 would prevent public employees from suing their unions for illegally collecting dues from their wages. At the same time, Stonier and many of her fellow union-supported colleagues have no problem in pushing for legislation (HB 1965) to allow any person to sue any private employer for any violation of state labor laws. Hypocritical? Yes, but calling this hypocrisy is
much too kind of a description for their actions. We all know why this is happening. It’s called payback. And it’s a ... well, you know. — BRIAN MINNICH
HR-1 a free speech killer in sheep’s clothing The Freedom Foundation has joined a coalition letter to Congressional leadership urging them to reject HR-1, the socalled “For the People Act,” warning it would have a deep chilling effect on free speech in America. In true Orwellian fashion, the “For the People Act” would have the opposite effect from its supporters’ stated goals. Rather than promote a more “responsive and
representative government,” HR-1 would expose the identities of Americans who contribute to nonprofit organizations, opening them up to intimidation and harassment by political opponents. Other provisions of the bill would require organizations like the Freedom Foundation to file burdensome reports with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for online content, include unnecessary disclaimers on online ads, and broaden the definition of political ‘coordination’ to prevent organizations from contacting members of Congress regarding policy issues. The Freedom Foundation knows all too well the limits some politicians will go to stifle speech with which they disagree. Please read the letter joined by a broad coalition of center-right groups representing millions of Americans across the country. — ASHLEY VARNER
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A PUBLI CATION OF THE FREED OM FOU NDATION
LITIGATING FREEDOM SUIT: WASHINGTON’S AG FERGUSON ALLEGEDLY COLLUDED WITH UNIONS By BILL McMORRIS Reprinted from WASHINGTON FREE BEACON FEB. 17, 2019
W
ashington Attorney General Bob Ferguson tried to cover up his office’s collusion with labor unions after a think tank asked for public records about their communications, according to a lawsuit. Ferguson is one of several Democrats seeking to resist the Trump administration’s directive that would prohibit states from siphoning Medicaid payments away from at-home caregivers and putting them in the pockets of labor unions, such as Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). The Freedom Foundation, a Washington state pro-free market think tank, requested public records about the attorney general’s communications with major public sector unions relating to the policy. In return, it received pages of emails from Ferguson’s office. The bodies of those messages were reduced to black ink, nearly everything redacted except for the salutations and signatures of the senders. Now the foundation is suing for the full records, saying that the government is covering up
its collusion with powerful labor organizations. “Defendant Bob Ferguson and his Office are illegally ignoring the (Public Records Act) to hide a political relationship between two powerful special interest groups,” the lawsuit obtained by the Washington Free Beacon says. “This Court should order the records to be disclosed immediately.” Ferguson’s press office did not respond to requests for comment about the public records request or the nature of his relationship with unions. In July, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued new rules that would prevent state governments from requiring home health aides, many of whom are caring for relatives, to pay a portion of their Medicaid reimbursements to labor organizations. Labor unions receive at least $71 million each year from such payments even after the Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that such a forced dues scheme in Illinois violated the Constitution. “The law provides that Medicaid providers must be paid directly and cannot have part of their payments diverted to third parties outside of a few very specific exceptions,” Acting Director Tim Hill said in a release announcing the rule.
“This proposed rule is intended to ensure that providers receive their complete payment, and any circumstances in which a state does divert part of a provider’s payment must be clearly allowed under the law.” Ferguson’s office has been one of the most ambitious in filing lawsuits against the Trump administration, leading the high-profile lawsuit against the executive order restricting travel from seven majority-Muslim nations. Maxford Nelsen, a labor policy expert at the Freedom Foundation, said the attorney general’s actions in this case are centered on advancing the interests of his political allies, rather than any concern for taxpayers or home health aides. “The Washington Attorney General will be using tax dollars to try and avoid having to disclose documents showing how his office is using tax dollars to protect unions’ ability to seize tax dollars from Medicaid,” Nelsen said. “The whole situation is exhibit A of the collusion taking place between Left Coast state governments and the unions they rely on for political support. The losers in this relationship are taxpayers and, in this case, home caregivers.” The think tank is now seeking damages if the state continues to bury the documents. The lawsuit asks the court to force the state to pay $100 each day for every page that it withholds from public view.
CAMPAIGN FINANCE CASE WILL CONTINUE Reprinted from RED STATE FEB. 17, 2019
A
TThurston County Superior Court judge on Feb. 15 dismissed a baseless counterclaim filed by Teamsters Local 117 in an ongoing campaign finance lawsuit brought against it by the Freedom Foundation. The ruling means the Freedom Foundation won’t be penalized for ensuring Teamsters 117 complies with the same laws other Washington residents do. Meanwhile, the union will have to explain in open court why a political action committee created for the purpose of supporting labor-approved candidates allegedly concealed hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of electioneering from the public and its own membership. The judge’s action is the latest turn in a case based on a complaint filed by the Freedom Foundation to the Washington State Attorney General’s Office in 2017, alleging that the union — through its surrogate the Teamsters Local 117 Segregated Fund — violated public
disclosure laws by not reporting dozens of campaign contributions funneled to political candidates and ballot measures in Washington state during the 2016-2017 election cycles. As a so-called “527 nonprofit,” the union PAC claims exemption from federal taxes but was required to annually report to the IRS or state its expenditures and contributions. The Freedom Foundation alleges it did neither. And when Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson — whose own two campaigns for office were heavily underwritten by government employee unions including the Teamsters — declined to act on the complaint, the Freedom Foundation filed suit on its own. Clearly trying to discourage any challenge to its political entanglements, Teamsters 117 responded with a retaliatory counterclaim, alleging that: n the Freedom Foundation selectively enforced public
disclosure requirements only against “Democratic and Democratic-leaning entities – particularly labor unions” that allegedly violate the public disclosure laws, such as Teamsters 117 itself; and, n by exercising its right under state law to file suit once the state had refused to, the Freedom Foundation became, in effect, an agent of state government. Judge Erik Price, throwing in a few pointed comments about the union’s “creative lawyering,” dismissed the counterclaim because the Freedom Foundation is obviously not an agent of the state. More importantly, the law could not hand Teamsters 117 a powerful tool with which to intimidate its foes. “This is what unions do when they know they’ve been dealt a losing hand,” said Freedom Foundation Chief Litigation Counsel Eric Stahlfeld. “Anyone else would simply fold their cards. But unions know they’re playing with their members’ money, so they continue to bluff, hoping we’ll blink first and let them take the pot.”
5
What They
&
What They What she said: “Fake organization. The Freedom Foundation only wants your money.” What she meant: “In point of fact, just the opposite is true. The Freedom Foundation doesn’t work on VIOLET GREENE commission. It Mill Creek, Wash. doesn’t generYouTube post Feb. 4, 2019. ate any more or less revenue based on the number of workers who opt out. All it gets is the satisfaction of knowing it helped someone. Meanwhile, each worker represents the potential for hundreds of dollars in dues money for the unions. Offhand, which would you say has more credibility and which has more incentive to lie? n n n
He said: “I urge you to read the New York Times report, released in June, 2018, which describes in considerable detail the lengths to which the Kochs and ... the Freedom Foundation ... have gone, to throw ERIC TALBOT Chicago monkey Online comment, wrenches in Streetsblog USA, light rail and Feb. 28, 2019 other public transportation projects around the country.” He meant: “Or you could consult a source with an ounce of credibility. In fact, the Freedom Foundation has never taken a position on light rail. But if you have to resort to inventing a boogeyman to justify your failures, what’s one more lie?” n n n
She said: “The (Freedom Foundation) may be pathetic ... but they ultimately aren’t dumb.” She meant: “That’s what gives it a huge competitive advantage over adversaries like me who actually believe the socialist tripe we spew.”
MEAGAN DAY
Oakland, Calif.
Staff writer, Jacobin Feb. 25, 2019
6
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A P U BL IC AT I ON OF T HE FREEDOM FOUNDAT I ON
The media has a field day as the Freedom Foundation holds a press conference to announce its plans to sue the California Teachers Association.
“...The Francisc lawsuit, brought o and the F lawyer Harmeet by San their Fir st A with unio reedom Foundati K. Dhillon o “Unions mendment rights bers afte ns scrambling to n, comes are unju . b e r r court said the 5-4 Janus ru etain mem- of nefit themselves stly enriched an li d a p n th t la g th . The inti ee employee at requiring p over the ffs by retaining th xpense ublic-sec s to pay u o to b e jections nion fees r consent and wit dues violates o Dhillon.” f the plaintiffs,” hout the said Ms.
“...Bethany Mendez, lead plaintiff and teacher in the Fremont Unified School District, said she was not informed she was no longer required to have the annual $1,500 union dues de-
Lead plaintiff Bethany Mendez and attorney Harmeet Dhillon fi
ducted from her pay, as mandated by a June 2018 Supreme Court decision Janus v. AFSCME. Mendez said she “heard about it from my husband” and not by the union.”
Freedo “...“The teache union never info rs claim the rmed them of th e rights recognize d in Janus, inst ead implying union dues or agency fees were still re quired, and that
the paperwork — language purpor which included te payments irrevoc dly making dues ply routine,” the able — was simFreedom Founda tion said...” -
nion u ia rn fo li a C e u s rs e Five teach ection over forced dues coll rmeet Dhillon r’s lawsuit “...The California teache t the tha s say sco nci filed in San Fra ion similarly union’s paycheck deduct ment rights end Am st Fir ir the violates on. of speech and associati ented by The teachers are repres
San Francisco lawyer Ha ion, an dat and the Freedom Foun sed politically Olympia, Washington-ba e Freedom Th conservative think tank. ed teachers ent Foundation has repres states.” suing unions in several
Five Teachers Sue California Union Over Forced Deductions
“...according to Freedom Foundation attorney Mariah Gondeiro-Watt, regardless of the union’s rules on her recommitment, any membership card signed before the June 27 Janus ruling is “worthless” unless the union can prove that the members were “fully appraised” of their rights. “It doesn’t make any difference when the teachers signed their membership forms,”
Ms. Gondeiro-Watt said. “No membership agreement before or since Janus is valid unless the public-sector worker affirmatively and knowingly agreed to waive his or her First Amendment rights.” The lawsuit states that the union never informed the teachers of their rights outlined in Janus, and continued to imply that union dues were still mandatory.”
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A PUBLI CATION OF THE FREED OM FOU NDATION
7
Five Educators Sue Calfornia T ea Union for Man datory Dues Co chers llection “...Five educator s su
ed the California Teac he Monday for man rs Association datory collection of dues. The teachers by San Francis are represented co Dhillon and cons lawyer Harmeet tank Freedom Foervative think Washington stat undation in e, The Associate d
Press reported. “These dues ar nancial impact e a negative fito who live in the a lot of teachers Bay Area where there is a high co Fremont Unifie st of living,” d teacher and plai School District nt Mendez said, ac iff Bethany cording to the AP.”
ia union rn o if al C e su s er h ac te Five tion over forced dues collec in union
field questions during the March 11 press conference in San Francisco.
ative fi“...These dues are a neg chers tea of lot a to t nancial impac where who live in the Bay Area ,” ng livi of t cos h hig a there is one of the said Bethany Mendez, education l cia spe a d an iffs int pla Unified nt mo Fre the teacher at said she ez nd School District. Me
pays $1,500 per year dues. suit “This is just another law n to tio da un Fo om eed Fr from the public edcontinue the attack on yees,” plo em c bli pu d an n tio uca sociation California Teacher As Briggs spokeswoman Claudia
Five teachers sue California union over mandatory dues deductions “...Five California educators on Monday filed a lawsuit seeking to stop the state’s top teachers union from collecting dues through mandatory paycheck deductions, the latest in a series of similar legal chal-
lenges filed across the country. The lawsuit challenging the California Teachers Association’s mandatory collection of dues follows a U.S. Supreme Court ruling barring the practice in the public sector.”
om Foundation attorney Mariah Gondeiro-Watt
“SHANNON BREAM: On the heels of a teacher strike in California, five teachers are suing the state’s top union over collected dues through mandatory paycheck deductions. Harmeet (Dhillon), I want you to clarify because Justice Alito was clear. He said in the decision last year, “We conclude that this arrangement violates the free speech rights of nonmembers by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern,” and he said unless these people affirmatively consent to giving the money, the unions can’t take it. Are you claiming that’s what happening in California? HARMEET DHILLON: That’s exactly what’s happening. Our five clients working in conjunction with the Freedom Foundation, which has filed this type of lawsuit and other states, are claiming they opted out of their union card contracts and despite having opted out, the union is not letting them out until the anniversary of their one-year contract. Every pay period their paychecks are being deducted significant money. In the case of the plaintiff Bethany Mendez, that’s $1,500 a year on a meager teacher salary. It’s a Constitutional violation. The Supreme Court was very clear that you cannot take this money unless there’s a knowing and voluntary waiver of the First Amendment. None of these teachers made a voluntary waiver of the First Amendment rights.”
8
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A P U BL IC AT I ON OF T HE FREEDOM FOUNDAT I ON
HOW ELSE WOULD UNIONS RESPOND TO FAILURE?
L
ying, like cheating, is learned behavior for Oregon’s government employee unions. Both became second nature in the decades during which their power and political influence grew virtually unchecked in this state. Consequently, it’s no surprise to see union leaders resort to what they know best now that the landscape has changed. Last summer, the U.S. Supreme Court pulled the rug out from under the unions when it ruled in Janus v. AFSCME that government employees can no longer be compelled to pay dues or fees as a condition of employment. And given a choice, huge numbers of
By AARON WITHE, Oregon Director
them are choosing not to. According to numbers compiled by the state of Oregon and obtained through an information request filed by the Freedom Foundation, SEIU 503 — the state’s largest labor union — lost 26 percent of its members in the first eight months after the ruling was issued. By our calculations, their defections are costing SEIU 503 more than $540,000 a month in lost revenue. And the total just keeps getting larger.
Oregon Update
Highlighting the successes being achieved by the Freedom Foundation’s office in the Beaver State.
Not coincidentally, the union announced last week its Salem headquarters building — SEIU 503’s home for more than 30 years — had been put up for sale. The union plans to buy a new building, but half the space in the structure will be rented out to the state. Got that? In order to make a few extra bucks, SEIU 503 plans to take boarders. And just in case you think this is one isolated example, perhaps the result of bad management or some unforeseeable calamity, consider that the Oregon State Education Association is doing even worse, having lost 31 percent of its strength during the same time period. Of the 22,415 employees represented by OSEA, only 15,535 were dues paying members as of February. But it isn’t just numbers. Judge by the unions’ actions, too. During the current legislative session, politicians in the pocket of Oregon’s public employee unions introduced a motley assortment of bills whose objective is to invalidate portions of the Janus ruling. Lastly, Oregon’s public employee unions have joined forces with their allies in Washington to spend millions of dues dollars on a black-money operation incongruously dubbed the Northwest Accountability Project whose sole duty is to smear the Freedom Foundation, a West Coast-based policy organization actively working to inform government employees of their rights under Janus to opt out of union support. Do these sound like the words and actions of someone with supreme confidence or someone who knew the plug was about to be pulled on their legalized protection racket?
HB 2016: UNIONS’ LATEST LOVE NOTE TO THEMSELVES
I
t comes as no surprise that during the first legislative session following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, government unions and their pet politicians in both Washington and Oregon are working feverishly to undermine it. It also comes as no surprise that the latest attempt to do so in Oregon also takes a swipe at the nation’s leading exponent of the values on which the ruling is based — the Freedom Foundation. House Bill 2016 would, “(r)equire … public employer(s) to grant reasonable paid time to public employee who is designated representative to engage in certain activities.” In layman’s terms, that means the state — or, more accurately, its taxpayers — must pay the salary of the union’s workplace representative, even though, by definition, his or her loyalty is to the union, not the employer. A similar conflict of interest would be unthinkable in the private sector, but such is the level of corruption in government that no legislation is too absurd to propose and no arrangement too awkward to impose where the demands of public employee unions are concerned. Unfortunately, that’s just the tip of the iceberg with HB-2016, which would also: n allow employees not represented by a government union to authorize dues deductions to a union; n make it easier for government unions to deduct dues while simultaneously making it harder for public
By BOAZ DILLON, Labor Policy Analyst
employees to cancel dues deductions; n require the state to periodically turn over personal employee information that is currently exempt from public disclosure to the union; n allow the union to establish what is reasonable conduct for all employees who attend union-related meetings; n censor public employers from notifying their employees about Janus; n allow government unions the right to use electronic mail systems or other forms of communication of a public employer to communicate with the employees in the bargaining unit; and, n make it an unfair labor practice for a public employer to release any email correspondence between the union and employees in a bargaining unit. That way they can message whatever they choose to public employees without fear of it becoming a matter of public record. More pointedly, the bill also targets the Freedom Foundation by trying to prevent the organization from contacting public employees. The bill states that it is an unfair labor practice for an employer to permit use of its email system by an entity to discourage union membership — for example, notifying them of their constitutional rights. It would also constitute an unfair labor practice for the employer to do so.
Instead of within 10 days of a new employees hire date and 120 days for all other employees, if the state obtains personal employee information, it must be turned over to the union immediately. This information would include, but is not limited to: n cell, home and work telephone numbers; n any means of electronic communication, including work and personal electronic mail addresses; and, n home addresses or personal mailing addresses. There’s little doubt this information is sought by the unions, so they can try to contact all those workers who’ve already opted out in hopes of changing their minds — by any means necessary. Post-Janus membership losses, not surprisingly, have been massive for Oregon public-sector unions. SEIU 503, for example, has seen 26 percent of its members defect, while OSEA has lost 31 percent. Again, the bill also lets the union designate what is appropriate conduct at union-related meetings for public employees. And you can bet your life asking about your constitutional rights under Janus will be deemed as unreasonable conduct. Bills like this are just a testament to both government union’s fear and corruption. Ask yourself this: If the Freedom Foundation was as inconsequential as the unions like to boast, would such drastic action be necessary?
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A PUBLI CATION OF THE FREED OM FOU NDATION
9
BEST OF THE BLOG COUNTY EMPLOYEE DOING UNION BUSINESS ON THE PUBLIC’S DIME MARCH 1, 2019
M
illions of taxpayer dollars nationwide are spent paying union officials to accomplish the union’s agenda even when it harms the public interest. This kind of union activity on the public dime got personal when Teamsters 1932 President Kathleen Brennan took steps to fight against the Freedom Foundation. In a document acquired as part of a Freedom Foundation information request, San Bernardino County provided email and work products Brennan prepared and sent from her county work account. In this document, she described the need for several people to form a committee to “fight” the Freedom Foundation’s efforts to educate members about their right to opt out of union membership. Brennan is the president of Teamsters Local 1932 and an employee of the Information Technology Department with San Bernardino County. While we certainly expect union bosses who receive millions in public employees’ wages to resist our efforts to inform members, taxpayers should not be compelled to fund the union’s war against the Conflict Freedom Foundation. of interest? Nor should the taxpayers, according What conflict to the San Bernardino of interest? County employee handbook: “Rule 1, Section 7 – Use of Public Property – Officials and employees are prohibited from using County-owned equipment, materials, or property for personal benefit or profit unless specifically authorized by the Board of Supervisors as an element of compensation.”
By SAMUEL COLEMAN, California Outreach Coordinator
The email was also sent at 2:10 p.m. on a Wednesday, right in the middle of an average work day. Rule 10 section 2 – “Cause for Suspension, Demotion, Reduction in Salary Step and Dismissal – Conducting personal business or work on County time.” This is one of several steps Teamsters local 1932 in San Bernardino County takes to oppose our efforts to inform workers. Brennnan denied the existence of the anti-Freedom Foundation committee during a KQED interview, but the energy to develop action steps and a possible “committee” to advance the private financial interests of a union is a violation of taxpayers’ trust. Public workers deserve the ability to make an informed choice when deciding if union membership is worth their money. The Freedom Foundation will continue to work to make sure they are informed, but we shouldn’t have to face tax-funded campaigns to silence our efforts.
FREEDOM FOUNDATION ATTORNEY GETS HER FIRST TASTE OF SEIU’S ROPE-A-DOPE TACTICS MARCH 7, 2019
O
Peter Starzynski’s Feb. 9 guest opinion (in the Spokesman Review), “Spokane County commissioners anti-labor resolution waste of taxpayers dollars,” was a mix of irrelevancies, conspiracies, halftruths and guilt-by-association accusations that failed to address the merits of the collective bargaining transparency resolution adopted by the county. As executive director — and sole employee — of the so-called “Northwest Accountability Project,” Starzynski is paid by labor unions to smear groups they don’t like. That doesn’t automatically mean his arguments are wrong. The problem is, he didn’t make any. He derides the Freedom Foundation as “fringe” for supporting a policy that Oregon and Idaho have adopted and that voters support. He portrays the Freedom Foundation as “out-of-state,” even though it was founded in Olympia in 1991 by Washingtonians and continues to be operated largely by Washingtonians. He incomprehensibly claims the Freedom Foundation’s support for public observation of the process by which unions and county officials decide how to spend tax dollars means its real goal is “destroying” public-sector jobs.
In this case, county-owned equipment may include email services and computers.
nly a few months on the job, Freedom Foundation Litigation Counsel Sydney Phillips kept the organization’s winning streak alive on Feb. 27 when she persuaded a Division 2 appellate court commissioner in Tacoma to dismiss SEIU 775’s latest frivolous motion. The overarching lawsuit concerns whether the union — which diverted more than half its revenues to political candidates during a single month in 2016 — meets the legal definition of a political action committee (PAC). And if so, why hasn’t it followed financial reporting laws laid out in the Washington Fair Campaign Practices Act (FCPA)? Since the Freedom Foundation filed its complaint against SEIU 775 in early 2018, the union has made three failed attempts to have the case dismissed by the trial court.
Letter to the Editor: As usual, union’s mouthpiece has only lies to offer
Starzynski’s only remotely substantive argument — that the legal authority of local governments to adopt the policy is disputable — neglected to mention the issue has yet to be settled in court. Such overheated and wild-eyed rhetoric adds nothing productive to the discussion. DOUG OLSON Chattaroy
By JEFF RHODES, Managing Editor
After those were all ultimately denied, SEIU 775 then turned its sights on Division 2, filing a motion for discretionary review. “This was an incredible learning opportunity for me,” said Phillips, who wrote the response and argued orally in opposition to the motion. “From Day 1, the Freedom Foundation has vowed to let its new attorneys go head-to-head against the unions and the attorneys who represent them, and I was grateful for the opportunity.” Assuming the motion is denied, the Freedom Foundation will continue to pursue its FCPA citizen action against SEIU 775 for failing to disclose its activities as a PAC to the Public Disclosure Commission.
n
n
n
I wish there was a way to stop (SEIU) from taking dues out of the checks of agency providers who have opted out so they could be rid of them permanently. Thank you for what you do to protect workers from this corrupt organization. Email from JULIE
10
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A P U BL IC AT I ON OF T HE FREEDOM FOUNDAT I ON
FREEDOM IN ACTION AOC’S GREEN SCHEME A-OK WITH HER UNION CRONIES Reprinted from the DAILY CALLER FEB. 6, 2019
T
he so-called “Green New Deal” dominating the headlines right now is being billed as a means to save the earth. But it would do so at the cost of wrecking the nation’s economy — and that’s apparently a tradeoff its advocates are willing to make. The brainchild of media-savvy freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the resolution would — among its many laughably impractical goals — devastate America’s energy and transportation infrastructure, effectively destroying the segment of the economy fueling the near-miraculous boom we’re currently enjoying and throwing millions of Americans out of work. While hard details in Ocasio-Cortez’s 14page manifesto are hard to come by, we know enough to be certain it would be a disaster if enacted. So much so that even two people with impeccable environmental “credentials,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, have scoffed at it. But a quick look under the hood reveals the Green New Deal goes far beyond just the energy industry. By including language guaranteeing every American a job and healthcare, and guaranteed income for those unwilling to work, the Green New Deal is a blatant and unmistakable push to grow government across the board. It’s got goodies for everyone who wants to increase government’s role in our lives. For example, the Green New Deal would roll back Janus v AFSCME, last year’s landmark U.S Supreme Court ruling freeing public employees from mandatory union dues as a condition of employment. This power grab would reclaim the glory days of government unions and, not coincidentally, re-energize the left’s electoral hopes. Since Janus, more than 40,000 workers on the West Coast have left their government unions, costing unions — and by extension the pet candidates and causes the left funds by skimming money from other peoples’ pay checks — more than $32 million a year. Forever. Understandably, this has the union leaders in a lather. They know that without government complicity and outside assistance, they will continue to lose membership and relevancy over time. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has emerged as the unions’ life line. Consider these elements her the “Green New Deal” resolution:
By ASHLEY VARNER, VP for COMMUNICATIONS
n Any Green New Deal bill must provide “the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation and harassment.” n It must also ensure “a commercial environment where every business person, large and small, is free from unfair competition and domination by monopolies domestically or internationally.” The proposal further promises that “the Green New Deal mobilization creates high-quality union jobs” while “strengthening and protecting the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment.” The ulterior motive here is obvious — funneling people into government union jobs paid for by trillions in taxpayer dollars, further enriching union leaders with millions of dollars a month in dues deductions from the paychecks of these new workers, to be used entirely on political influence. The Green New Deal should be exposed for what it is — a power play from the left to make every “clean” job a government union job, thus creating a loyal voting bloc that raises campaign cash and funds the very politicians with whom they’re expected to negotiate. As the influence of government unions wanes because of the free choice of workers post-Janus, the Green New Deal represents a Hail Mary pass to revive their political power, whatever its cost to taxpayers. Efforts on the West Coast to protect an employee’s freedom to leave their union has revealed the left’s true aim — to keep unionmembership mandatory and union coffers flush with cash to benefit union bosses and their friendly politicians — regardless of how it impacts individual workers. They will go to great lengths to make that happen — including shoving more government down Americans’ throats. The Green New Deal would make their dream a reality. For them. But for the average American worker, it is nothing more than a nightmare that will bankrupt our economy and our country.
MOVING: CASH-STRAPPED SEIU 503 SELLING HEADQUARTERS CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 plains their desperate efforts to stop the hemorrhaging. Once SEIU 503 came to grips with the fact that Janus had become its worst nightmare come to life, the union’s leaders began circulating new membership cards with deceptive fine print that essentially holds members hostage for up to a year.
They insist members can opt out whenever they choose, but deceptively neglect to mention the union will continue deducting dues from his or her paycheck until they reapply during an arbitrary annual window. This practice is about what you’d expect from the union’s snake oil salesmen, and the Freedom Foundation is currently engaged in active litigation in federal court to assist thousands of public employees still
forcibly paying union dues. The Freedom Foundation has been in this fight with SEIU 503 for almost four years. Though our work is not yet complete, this desperate and ethically questionable move validates our effectiveness and their lack of ability to provide benefits that justify the hundreds and thousands of dollars they take from public employees.
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A PUBLI CATION OF THE FREED OM FOU NDATION
11
FREEDOM IN THE NEWS IN PRINT
FEB. 27, 2019
IN PRINT
FEB. 28, 2019
CONSERVATIVE GROUPS CONTINUE PUSH TO WEAKEN HEALTHCARE UNIONS “The Freedom Foundation also filed an amicus brief in support of the petitioners in Bierman and another case called Uradnik v. Inter Faculty Organization, according to Maxford Nelsen, the organization’s labor policy director. ‘They’ve asked the Supreme Court to “grant review and hold that allowing a union to control a public employee’s relationship with their employer against their wishes violates the First Amendment.’ Nelsen said.” ON AIR
FEB. 24, 2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TEAMSTERS BATTLE CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK’S LOCAL EFFORT TO WEAKEN GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE UNIONS “That’s Sam Coleman with the Freedom Foundation. They filed a public records request with San Bernardino County and found that Teamsters president Kathleen Brennan had sent an email from her county email to her Teamsters email about the creation of a committee to counter the Foundation’s efforts.”
HOW TO REBUILD THE LABOR MOVEMENT, STATE BY STATE “The Freedom Foundation has reportedly trained 80 canvassers to start knocking on the doors of public-sector workers in California, Oregon, and Washington to convince them to opt out of their unions.” IN PRINT
Feb. 22, 2019
AG’S OFFICE PENALIZES SEIU COUNCIL 14 “It was in July 2017 that the state attorney general’s office filed charges against the union after it received a citizen action notice from the Freedom Foundation alleging multiple violations of the state’s public disclosure laws in April 2017. The charge alleged that Council 14 failed to register and report as a political committee to the Washington Public Disclosure Commission.”
12
LIVING LIBERTY
|
A P U BL IC AT I ON OF T HE FREEDOM FOUNDAT I ON
Reprinted from the SPOKESMAN REVIEW By JAMI LUIND, Senior Policy Analyst
MARCH 7, 2019
W
hile much attention is focused on the legislature’s state capital gains income tax, a much more significant tax increase to bail out school districts – Senate Bill 5313 – has been advancing under the radar. Under the watchful eye of the Washington state Supreme Court, state funding for schools has increased more than 60 percent since the McCleary education funding ruling in 2012. According to the SchoolDataProject.com, per-student spending is now at $15,032, up from $9,816 when McCleary was issued. In the Spokane school district, per-student spending has grown from $10,358 to $15,606. Despite this fact, many school districts are on the verge of going broke and cutting education services. The Spokane school district is showing an operating deficit of $12.6 million this year and expects to reduce services to families. The district’s ending fund balance will be $125 million negative within three years. How does this happen? First, let’s recap the flaws of the funding system that led the Supreme Court to conclude the state was not properly funding education in both McCleary and in the similar, earlier 1977 Doran decision. The state has a constitutional obligation to fund the costs of basic education without relying on local levies for basic expenses like educator wages. In 1977 and again in 2011, plaintiffs argued that the widespread practice of using local levies to supplement teacher salaries was proof of insufficient state funding. The legislative solution approved by the governor and the court did four things. For starters, it increased the
state property tax by about 80 to 90 cents per $1,000 of assessed value. Secondly, it increased the state-allocated per-teacher salary by 17 percent from $55,705 to $65,216. Areas with higher living costs received as much as 24 percent more, or over $80,000 average per teacher. Third, it ended districts’ ability to use levy funds to increase teachers’ wages above the state-funded salary. Most districts have previously agreed to contracts providing levy funds to enhance wages by 3 to 37 percent. The new state funding for teacher wages was supposed to offset the reduction in levy-funded wages. Fourth, it lowered the maximum property tax rate that could be set by local school levies since they were no longer to be used for educator pay. Unfortunately, this solution was intolerable for the union executives at the Washington Education Association (WEA). They prefer to retain the ability to push for wage increases at both the state and local level. The union wasn’t willing to let districts comply with the law, ending this unsustainable and unfair practice. WEA deceived teachers and the public about how state funding was supposed to be used and pushed districts to cannibalize levy-funded school services for families to feed the union’s wage increase demands. WEA agitated for hard bargaining that ignored the law capping raises and prohibiting levy money from being used for wage enhance-
ments. The union instigated multiple strikes when some districts resisted. Elected school boards were intimidated or were comprised of union-supporters and gave in to WEA’s extraordinary wage demands. WEA even posted a war map, crowing about raises ranging from 12 percent to 34 percent. In the Spokane school district, WEA notes that educators received a 14.3 percent pay raise after threats of a strike to follow on raises awarded after a strike threat in 2015. The average teacher wage awarded at the bargaining table is reported to be $80,878, even though the state allocation for Spokane teacher salaries is $69,128. Small wonder that now many districts are projected to reach insolvency within four years. This is to be expected when the state provides funds for educator wages averaging $65,000 to $80,000 but districts agree to contracts obligating them to pay more in wages than the state provided for. The problem isn’t the very large increase in revenue and state property taxes. The problem is the union machinations resulting in even larger payroll obligations, and the remedy isn’t a return to the unfair system created by rampant local levy taxes for wage increases. Instead, school boards should stand against the WEA’s special interest and fight for services now being cut. School districts, the legislature, the courts and the state auditor can enforce statutory limitations on collective bargaining that created these problems. Bailing out districts with a local property tax increase will only reproduce to the failed system the court and legislature already addressed with the policies implementing the McCleary ruling.
ACTION TIMELINE SPOTLIGHTING SOME OF THE FREEDOM FOUNDATION’S NOTEWORTHY ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE PAST MONTH
Feb. 15 A Thurston County Superior Court judge dismisses a baseless counterclaim filed by Teamsters Local 117 in an ongoing campaign finance lawsuit brought against it by the Freedom Foundation. The ruling means the Freedom Foundation won’t be penalized for ensuring Teamsters 117 complies with the same laws other Washington residents do. Meanwhile, the union will have to explain in open court why a political action committee created for the purpose of supporting labor-approved candidates allegedly concealed hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of electioneering from the public and its own membership. Feb. 22 According to numbers posted to the Oregon Education Association’s website during February, a third or more of the union’s dues-paying members have defected in just the eight months since Janus. Of the state’s 22,415 educators, only 15,535 were OEA
members as of February a 30 percent drop since last September that doesn’t even include those who opted out between June 27 and Sept. 1, 2018. In all, 19 percent of the union’s 139 chapters are currently below their 2018 membership levels. Much of the membership erosion can be attributed to the Freedom Foundation’s outreach efforts to teachers who might not otherwise know their legal rights.
Harmeet Dhillon file a class-action lawsuit against the California Teachers Association alleging the union violated their First Amendment rights by continuing to deduct union dues from their wages over their repeatedly stated objections. The suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, claims CTA operatives pressured the teachers to renew their union membership when it appeared the U.S. Supreme Court would rule as it ultimately did last June in Janus v. AFSCME that public-sector workers cannot be compelled to financially support a union as a condition of employment. The story is carried by newspapers and websites all over the country and is debated live on Fox News.
Feb. 26
March 13
The Daily Caller publishes a guest opinion authored by Freedom Foundation Vice President for Communications Ashley Varner. Headlined “AOC’S ‘Green Scheme a Windfall for Unions,” the piece highlights U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s connections to public-sector unions and the freebies her so-called ‘Green New Deal’ would shower on them.”
SEIU 503, which has lost 26 percent of its membership since the Janus ruling last summer, puts the Salem, Ore., headquarters building it has occupied for more than 30 years up for sale. The union has been subjected to unrelenting pressure from the Freedom Foundation, resulting in revenue losses estimated at $540, 000 a month. Sources say SEIU 503 will move its operations into half of its new location, and will lease the other half to the state of Oregon. The Freedom Foundation is investigating to make sure state officials don’t cut a sweetheart deal with their union cronies.
March 11 Four California teachers represented by the Freedom Foundation and San Francisco Attorney