Reed & Perrine Lawn Products Workers Escape Union After Fighting Frivolous Union Delay Tactics

After workers requested union removal vote in 2024, union bosses blocked the vote for a year and a half using specious allegations
Manalapan Township, NJ (April 22, 2026) – After a year-and-a-half delay caused by frivolous union legal tactics, employees at Reed & Perrine Lawn Products (a division of The Andersons, Nasdaq: ANDE) have finally succeeded in removing United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 152 union officials from power at their workplace. Reed & Perrine employee Christine Bradach kicked off the effort among her coworkers to remove the UFCW union in November 2024 when she filed a decertification petition at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Bradach received free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in filing her petition.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law, a task that includes administering elections to install (or “certify”) and remove (or “decertify”) unions. Bradach’s petition contained employee signatures well in excess of the threshold required to prompt the NLRB to hold a decertification election. Bradach’s work unit includes production department and shipping department employees at Reed & Perrine Lawn Products.
Almost immediately after Bradach had filed her petition, UFCW union bosses filed so-called “blocking charges” to stop the vote from happening. Blocking charges are unproven allegations of employer misconduct that union officials file in order to delay or derail an employee-requested union decertification election. Blocking charges often have little or nothing to do with employees’ reasons for wanting to vote out a union, yet NLRB officials will frequently delay decertification elections for months or years without even holding a hearing into the charges’ veracity or connection to employee dissatisfaction.
In Bradach’s case, NLRB Region 22 blocked Bradach and her coworkers’ requested vote based on UFCW officials’ blocking charges. Almost a year and a half later, UFCW union officials withdrew the blocking charges – presumably because the NLRB communicated that it would finally dismiss them for having no merit. Immediately after NLRB Region 22 announced it would finally take up Bradach’s petition, UFCW Local 152 officials announced they were “disclaiming interest” in continuing their control over the facility – in other words, leaving the facility immediately to avoid an employee vote that would have likely ended in a lopsided loss for the union.
UFCW Union Officials Continued to Take Dues While Blocking Removal Vote
New Jersey lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector employees. This means UFCW union officials had the power to enforce contracts that required Reed & Perrine employees to pay money to the union or be fired. In contrast, in states that have Right to Work laws, union membership and all union financial support are strictly voluntary.
“My colleagues and I had had it with the UFCW, but they stuck around in the workplace after we made it clear we no longer wanted the union,” commented Bradach. “It’s a farce for them to claim they ‘represented’ us, especially when they were actively trying to block us from just having a vote on whether we wanted to continue with the union. My colleagues and I are glad we’re finally free.”
Trump NLRB Urged to Eliminate ‘Blocking Charge’ Policy
The Foundation has pressed the NLRB for years to end its non-statutory blocking charge policy. The Foundation has instead advocated for a return to the Election Protection Rule, which prevented many aspects of blocking charge-related gamesmanship before the Biden NLRB overturned it in 2022. Under the Election Protection Rule, allegations of misconduct related to a union decertification election could not block employees from exercising their right to vote. In most cases, the Rule permitted the immediate release of the vote tally as opposed to ordering ballots to be impounded during litigation over blocking charges.
“As Ms. Bradach’s case shows all too well, the ‘blocking charge’ policy just incentivizes union officials to act cynically and opportunistically while the rights of the workers they claim to ‘represent’ suffer,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “An approach that is more protective of workers’ rights is found in the Election Protection Rule, which mandates that allegations over interference be dealt with after employees have had a chance to exercise their right to vote.
“The Trump NLRB should work quickly to protect workers’ freedom of choice from restrictive and unreasonable doctrines like the ‘blocking charge’ policy, which serve only to empower union special interests to the detriment of the rights of rank-and-file workers,” added Mix.
###
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, assists thousands of employees in about 200 cases nationwide per year. Its web address is www.nrtw.org.
