Take Action Publications Press Room About Public Citizen Public Citizen Divisions Home
Protecting citizens' rights in the courts

JOIN US! |Take Action | Publications | About Litigation Group | Contact Us
Search

For Keyword(s)
advanced search

Email Signup

Sign up for our free activist updates.

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

 

Due 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

 

Elections

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.

 

ERISA

Gable v. Sweetheart Cup Company, Inc.

 

Free Speech

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

 

Libel

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.

Public Citizen Press Release (1/4/2006)
> Public Citizen Press Release (1/17/2004)

 

Workplace Communications

Held v. American Airlines

    » litigation | briefs | UnionDemocra


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.


Hot Issues
Publications
Join | Contact PC | Contribute | Site Map | Careers/Internships| Privacy Statement