ÃÛÖ­ÏãÌÒ

Legal Principle at Issue

Whether a union of public employees may, consistent with the First Amendment, require non-union members covered by the collective bargaining agreement to help defray the cost of (1) lobbying activities unrelated to the collective bargaining agreement, (2) the parent union's collective bargaining costs, (3) disseminating information concerning the parent union's litigation activities, (4) public relations expenditures, (5) disseminating general information about job opportunities, professional development, and award programs, (6) sending delegates to the union's national convention, and (7) preparing for a strike that would have been illegal under state law.

Action

Affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part and remanded. Petitioning party received a favorable disposition.

Facts/Syllabus

A Michigan teachers union, pursuant to state law, required all employees in the bargaining unit who did not belong to the union to pay a service fee equivalent to the amount of dues paid by each union member. Some of the non-union members objected to the union's use of the service fee for purposes other than negotiating and administering the collective bargaining agreement, claiming that the non-agreement uses violated the non-members' First Amendment rights. The trial court and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the union could use the service fee for (1) lobbying activities unrelated to the collective bargaining agreement, (2) the parent union's collective bargaining costs, (3) disseminating information concerning the parent union's litigation activities, (4) public relations expenditures, (5) disseminating general information about job opportunities, professional development, and award programs, (6) sending delegates to the union's national convention, and (7) preparing for a strike that would have been illegal under state law.

Compulsory affiliation with, or monetary support of, a union of public employees does not, without more, violate the First Amendment rights of non-members. Public employees, however, cannot be required to contribute to the support of an ideological cause that he or she may oppose. Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Education,431 U.S. 209 (1977). Non-union members can be charged with union expenses that are (1) germane to collective bargaining activity, (2) justified by the government's vital policy interest in labor peace and avoiding "free riders," and (3) not a significant burden on free speech. Ellis v. Railway Clerks, 466 U.S. 435 (1984).

Importance of Case

The Court again recognized the importance of non-members' First Amendment rights in the union context. The various opinions (with the exception of Justice Marshall's) differ only in the degree to which they reflect an anti-union bias. The majority of the Court followed the reasoning in Ellisin. Justices Scalia, O'Connor, Souter, and Kennedy, however, argued that the test should be more restrictive and that a union should be able to use non-member funds only to perform the union's statutory duties as the exclusive bargaining agent.