What They What They

By ERIC STAHLFELD, Chief Litigation Counsel

obligation to accept mail sent on behalf of their own members, the Freedom Foundation filed suit against Teamsters 117 and two others in the Western District of Washington. Stunningly, the court issued an initial ruling that refused to require the unions to accept the opt-out cards. Then, five days after Freedom Foundation attorneys requested relevant information from the unions, their attorneys filed a motion for summary judgment, hoping to quash the case with no further discussion.

The unions clearly had much to hide.

In their January motion for summary judgment, the unions insisted they had accepted and processed the opt-out cards but neglected to mention that was only true for the cards they had been tricked into accepting.

The unions then tried to convince the court all the opt-out cards had been received and processed by them months before the Freedom Foundation filed its lawsuit.

This is yet another example of the lies unions tell.

The Freedom Foundation filed documents with the court in May that showed that the unions had refused to accept opt-out cards even after the suit had been filed.

Finally, the unions asserted the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decisions in Belgau and Wright dictated the court decide the case in the unions’ favor. They argued it was simply a matter of a contract between the unions and the employees instead of recognizing there cannot be any question about a contract until after they accept and open the mail that tells them an employee wants out.

Freedom Foundation attorneys noted that an employee’s First Amendment right to resign and stop paying union dues cannot be exercised until after the unions receive notice from the employee.

WHAT SHE SAID: “The only thing the Freedom Foundation wants to break up is your and your co-workers’ collective bargaining strength so we can’t improve your pay, benefits and working conditions.”

WHAT SHE MEANT:

“The Freedom Foundation’s mission is to protect the right of public employees to make their own choice about workplace representation. If the workers desire to be in a union, nothing the Freedom Foundation says or does can stop them. But if enough opt out to weaken the union, it was never legitimate to begin with. Loyalty is inspired with service, not force.”

SUSAN OEHLER Public Relations Specialist Columbus, Ohio CWA Local 4502 Feb. 22, 2023 n n n

WHAT SHE SAID: “(The Freedom Foundation mailer) is a reminder that we must all be diligent and continue to make sure our members are all aware of the benefits they gain by being a member of CSEA and what they would lose without us.”

MARY SULLIVAN

President, CSEA Unit 9200 Albany, N.Y. March

4, 2023

WHAT SHE MEANT: “In a word, nothing. By law, public employees cannot be punished for exercising their First Amendment right to decline union membership and dues. They must still earn the same pay and benefits as unionized employees and the union must represent nonmembers just as forcefully as members. Public employees lose nothing by opting out and gain back the dues dollars their union had been confiscating.” n n n

WHAT HE SAID: “What (Montana’s Right-to-Work bill) does is it starts to erode and defund unions.

If you have half the people coming into your union, and they don’t have to pay the freight for the benefit the others are paying for, then it starts to erode.”

WHAT HE MEANT:

“So the only fair solution is to violate the First Amendment rights of the other half at least by compelling them to pay good money for a service they don’t need or want.”