petition to Wayne Gold NLEB

From: Member local 280

To Wayne R. Gold, Regional Director NLRB

CC:

Date: December 8, 2013

Reference: Case 5-RC-104853

Subject: Attempt to use the NLRB to victimize members of local 280

Sir, with reference to your letter of 12/2/13 addressed to Watkins security Agency of D. C., Inc. and Covenant Security Services, Ltd pertaining to case 5-Rc-104853, I as a members of a local 280 desires to direct your attention to the fact that the second blocking charges granted to Security Police Fire professionals of America (SPFPA) by your office only denies we the local 280 members our right to choose any union of our choice for the purpose of Collective Bargaining agreement; Granting these blocking charges victimizes us and leaves us at the mercy of SPFPA’s antics of delay, deny and financial exploit tactics.

Six months ago or thereabout SPFPA sought and obtained blocking charge from your office thereby denying us then our right to a yes or a no vote to change of union; while SPFPA continued to collect union dues from the members. After thorough investigation your office concluded that SPFPA blocking Charges then lacked merit and were bogus. Consequently that blocking charges by SPFPA were dismissed, block to election lifted and election scheduled by your office. Presently, SPFPA have filed yet another bogus blocking charge that like the first one completely lacks any merit, in my opinion. And your office have yet again granted SPFPA another blocking charge thereby once again delaying and denying us our right and desire to have a referendum to SPFPA’s six years union stewardship at the U.S department of labor. While at the same time NLRB allows SPFPA to continue to financially exploit us through union dues collections. Granting SPFPA first and now second blocking charges based on bogus claims not only deny local 280 members’ right to a union of their choosing but it also delays and denies business opportunity to other union organizations competing against SPFPA. We believe that NLRB as an agency of the government is neither in the business of choosing winners and losers between union organizations, nor does it takes side in business disputes, nor does it disregards the welfare and interest of the majority of union’s local members.


In my opinion, what SPFPA seeks with these repeat blocking charges is neither legal redress, nor legal interpretation nor legal adjudication but tactical maneuver of delay, financially exploit and may be deny local 280 members, their right to have union of their choice. SPFPA would continue to file these bogus blocking charges as long as it perceives an NLRB that is willing to grant one and as long as it continues to collect union dues. SPFPA has lost nothing but have gained everything with its bogus blocking charges and will continue to file one bogus charge after another so long as it continued to collect union dues. In order to put to an end to SPFPA’s bogus blocking charges and to allow for election I request NLRB to direct the employers to cease deducting union dues from the members’ pay pending the outcome of the investigation on SPFPA blocking charges and consequently pending the outcome of eventual election.

Majority of today’s unions especially security unions have become racketeers that operate on philosophy of quid pro quo and ally with the money. But I and local 280 members have absolute confidence that NLRB and personnel working in this labor agency will be fair, impartial and follow due process in the discharge of their duty responsibilities.

Yours truly,

Anonymous