|
 Justices John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy and Antonin Scalia
indicated during an 80-minute oral argument that they could join the
nine-member court's two other conservatives to overturn a 1977 high
court precedent allowing the fees, a vital source of funds for the
unions.
Legal experts had thought Scalia might be sympathetic to the union
position due to prior votes and statements on the subject, but his
questions signaled support for the 10 non-union California public
school teachers who challenged the fees.
U.S. conservatives have long sought to curb the influence of unions
representing public employees like police, firefighters and teachers
that often support the Democratic Party and liberal causes.
A ruling allowing non-union workers to stop paying "agency fees"
equivalent to union dues, currently mandatory under laws in about
half the 50 states including California, could strip public sector
unions of millions of dollars, reducing their income and political
power.
 About 5 million public sector employees are subject to union
contracts that include mandatory fee provisions, according to the
National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which backs the
non-union teachers.
Unions worry that a ruling throwing out the fees would give workers
less incentive to join because they would get all the benefits of
collective bargaining without having to pay for it.
Chief Justice Roberts and Kennedy appeared unsympathetic to the
California Teachers Association's argument that non-members would
become “free-riders” if not required to pay the fees to fund
collective bargaining activities.
"The union basically is making these teachers 'compelled riders' for
issues on which they strongly disagree," Kennedy said.
Roberts said the majority of the California teachers union's members
appeared to back collective bargaining, making the "free-riders"
concern "really insignificant."
The teachers who filed the lawsuit in 2013 are asking the justices
to overturn the 1977 Abood v. Detroit Board of Education Supreme
Court ruling that allowed these unions to collect fees from workers
who are not members as long as the money is not spent on political
activities.
California teachers generally pay around $1,000 annually in union
dues. Non-members can opt out of paying for union political
activities, which means they pay around $600 a year in mandatory
fees covering collective bargaining.
Several justices hinted at the difficulties of separating out
political issues in a way that would not infringe upon the
free-speech rights under the U.S. Constitution of non-members who
disagree with the union.
"The problem is that everything that is collectively bargained with
the government is within the political sphere, almost by
definition," Scalia said.
[to top of second column] |
'RIGHT-TO-WORK' STATES
Roberts and Scalia seemed skeptical that unions would collapse
without fees from non-union employees, in part because such fees are
already banned in 25 states that have what is known as
"right-to-work" laws. In those states, unions still represent
workers but membership rates are lower.
Federal employee unions also cannot collect such fees.
Even when the union’s lawyer, David Frederick, sought to explain
routine issues on which the union negotiates such as teacher lunch
breaks, he faced hostile questions.
Kennedy said if the union believes it is doing a sound job
negotiating over such daily concerns, "the union can convince people
to join."
The court's liberals defended the current practice and said justices
usually think twice before overturning long-standing precedents.
"You come here with a heavy burden," Justice Elena Kagan told the
teachers' lawyer, Michael Carvin.
A ruling favoring the non-union teachers would be a blow to
organized labor because unionized teachers and other civil servants
in states without "right-to-work" laws comprise its main power base.
Public sector workers are almost six times more likely to belong to
a union than those in the private sector.
The dispute pits non-union teachers and the Christian Educators
Association International against the California Teachers
Association, an influential union with 325,000 members. The
conservative Center for Individual Rights sued on behalf of lead
plaintiff Rebecca Friedrichs, an elementary school teacher in
Anaheim, and the other teachers.
The union noted that California law requires it to represent all
workers when negotiating with the state, regardless of whether they
are members.
A ruling is due by the end of June.
(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
