|Protecting citizens' rights in the courts|
Union Democracy and Worker's Rights
Jump to a topic:
Deferral to Arbitration
Consolidated Edison Co. of NY and Carmine Prata
Deferral to the Intra-Union Appellate Process
English v. Cowell, et al.
English & Owens v. Siddens, et al.
Georgopoulos & Auriemma v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Wildberger v. American Federation of Government Employees
Cox v. Via, et al.
Chao & Stomper v. Amalgamated Transit Union
The international election of the Amalgamated Transit Union invalidated under Title IV because a rule governing eligibility to run for convention delegate — that members must have attended at least half the local union meetings for a period of up to two years before the nominations — denied 95% of the members from running against the incumbent officers and was not needed to advance legitimate union interests.
USA v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, et al.
Gable v. Sweetheart Cup Company, Inc.
Black v. Teamsters Local 519, et al.
Franza v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Guidry v. International Union of Operating Engineers
Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Teamsters Local 2000, et al.
Quigley v. Giblin
Members of the International Union of Operating Engineers sued their union for adopting a rule requiring union members who create web sites about union election contests to "password protect" the sites so that only members of the union can visit the sites. The members argue that the federal Union Members' Bill of Rights guarantees their right to speak publicly about union affairs, not just to other union members, and that in any event the password protection requirement imposes unjustified limits on speech even to other union members. The suit also contends that a union rule that threatens large fines against members who fail to exhaust intra-union remedies violates the right to sue also guaranteed by the Union Members' Bill of Rights, Title I of the LMRDA.
Rumore v. Belk
Stone v. Kilmury, et al.
Preemption of State Law Claims
Humphrey v. Sequentia, Inc.
Reece v. Houston Lighting and Power Company
Spearman v. Exxon Coal, USA, Inc.
Stikes v. Chevron USA, Inc.
Statute of Limitations
Consolidation Coal v. Billy D. Williams
Is the Court of Appeals' finding that it is "inherently unfair" to bar a 2001 claim for black lung benefits filed six years after a medical determination of total disability due to pneumoconiosis contrary to the time limits imposed by Congress?
North Star Steel Company v. Thomas, et al.
Reed v. United Transportation Union, et al.
Trade Act Training
ATF v. DOL
This suit alleged that the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) systematically violated The Trade Act of 1974 by failing to ensure that Spanish-speaking workers who lost their jobs in the wake of NAFTA received the vocational training to which they were entitled under the Trade Adjustment Assistance program. Although the program was intended to provide effective job retraining to workers who lose their jobs because of trade agreements, the DOL sent thousands of Hispanic trade-dislocated workers to remedial English classes that did not help the workers learn new job skills.
The lawsuit was filed by Public Citizen and Texas RioGrande Legal Aid on behalf of Asociación de Trabajadores Fronterizos (the Association of Border Workers, or ATF). The lawsuit was filed in federal court in DC and transferred to the Western District of Texas. The suit alleged that the DOL violated the law by allowing state agencies that implement the program to: 1) approve incomplete training; 2) renounce Congress’ 80 percent wage replacement objective for all Trade Act training; and 3) ignore the preference for on-the-job training.
After ATF’s motion for summary judgment was briefed and argued, the case was settled. The settlement requires DOL to spend $6.5 million on new job training for El Paso workers who previously received deficient training, and requires nationwide policy changes that will end each of the agency practices that the workers alleged were unlawful.
Held v. American Airlines
Because Public Citizen does not accept funds from corporations, professional associations or government agencies, we can remain independent and follow the truth wherever it may lead. But that means we depend on the generosity of concerned citizens like you for the resources to fight on behalf of the public interest. If you would like to help us in our fight, click here.
||Join | Contact PC | Contribute | Site Map | Careers/Internships| Privacy Statement|