Conservative US top court justices skeptical over union fees

Before you go, we thought you'd like these...
Before you go close icon
Supreme Court Union Fee Case Could Cripple Organized Labor

WASHINGTON, Jan 11 (Reuters) - Conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices on Monday voiced support for a challenge to state laws that force non-union workers to pay fees to public-sector unions in a case that could erode organized labor's clout.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, two key votes on the nine-member court, indicated during an 80-minute oral argument in the case involving California teachers that they could side with the three other conservative justices in delivering a ruling overturning a 1977 high court precedent.

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. The case before the justices was spearheaded by a conservative group called the Center for Individual Rights.

A ruling allowing non-union workers to stop paying "agency fees" equivalent to union dues, currently mandatory under state law, would deprive the public sector unions of millions of dollars, reducing their income and political power.

Learn more about some of the landmark cases in Supreme Court history:

Supreme Court SCOTUS landmark cases
See Gallery
Conservative US top court justices skeptical over union fees
An estimated 5,000 people, women and men, march around the Minnesota Capitol building protesting the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision, ruling against state laws that criminalize abortion, in St. Paul, Minn., Jan. 22, 1973. The marchers formed a "ring of life" around the building. (AP Photo)
1966: Since 1966 police have to advise a suspect that they have the right to remain silent and the right to counsel during interrogation. The so called 'Miranda Warning' after Ernesto Miranda who had a retrial because he was not so advised. (Photo by MPI/Getty Images)
Clarence Earl Gideon, 52-year-old mechanic who changed the course of legal history, is seen shortly after his release from prison on August 6, 1963 in Panama City, Florida. In 1961, Gideon was wrongly charged with burglary and sentenced to five years in prison. Gideon filed an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that his constitutional right to liberty was denied when Florida refused him an attorney. In a landmark decision later known as Gideon v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court ruled in his favor, stating that anyone accused of a crime should be guaranteed the right to an attorney, whether or not he or she could afford one. (AP Photo)
Linda Brown Smith, 9, is shown in this 1952 photo. Smith was a 3rd grader when her father started a class-action suit in 1951 of the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kan., which led to the U.S. Supreme Court's 1954 landmark decision against school segregation. (AP Photo)
African American students at a segregated school following the supreme court case Plessy vs Ferguson established Separate But Equal, 1896. (Photo by Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images)
Dollree Mapp, 12, who was involved in a Landmark U.S. Supreme court decision concerning illegal search and seizure in 1931, is escorted into 105th precinct in New York by CET. John Bergersen. She was arrested in her apartment in Queens, New York City on February 18, where police said they recovered drugs valued at $800,000. A man, Allen Lyins, 33, was also taken into custody. The landmark decision, Mapp V. Ohio, found for Mrs. Mapp on grounds that police had forcibly searched her apartment in 1961 with out search warrant. (AP Photo)
President Nixon tells a White House news conference, March 15, 1973, that he will not allow his legal counsel, John Dean, to testify on Capitol Hill in the Watergate investigation and challenged the Senate to test him in the Supreme Court. (AP Photo/Charles Tasnadi)
Supporters of the U.S. Supreme Courts ruling on same-sex marriage gather on the step of the Texas Capitol for a news conference celebrating marriage equality and looking to important work ahead, Monday, June 29, 2015, in Austin, Texas. The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)
Some of the parents who brought suit against public schoolroom prayer in the Herricks School District pose with some of their children at Roslyn Heights, a Long Island suburb of New York City, after the Supreme Court said the prayer was unconstitutional on June 26, 1962. The group was sparked by Lawrence Roth, right foreground. Parents are, at center, left to right, Thelma Engel, Ruth Liechtenstein and the Roths. Children are, left to right, rear: Michael Engel, 11; Dan Roth, 17; Judy Liechtenstein, 19; and Joe Roth, 14. Front: Jonathan Engel, 4, and Madeleine Engel, 7. (AP Photo)

Both 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 because they would benefit from collective bargaining without having to pay for it.

Kennedy said that non-members currently are "compelled riders" if they disagree with the union's stances on various issues. Roberts said the issue of "free-riders" was "insignificant."

The 10 teachers that filed the lawsuit in 2013 are asking the justices to overturn a 1977 Supreme Court ruling in the case Abood v. Detroit Board of Education that allowed public sector unions to collect fees from workers who do not want representation as long as the money is not spent on political activities.

READ MORE: Union fees from 5 million workers targeted at US Supreme Court

Non-members can opt out of paying the union's political activities. But several of the justices hinted at the difficulties of separating out political issues in a way that would not infringe upon the free-speech rights of non-members who disagree with the union.

Roberts and Scalia both seemed skeptical at the suggestion unions would collapse without the fees paid by non-union employees, in part because such fees are already banned in the 25 states that have what is known as "right-to-work" laws. Federal employee unions also cannot collect such fees.

SEE ALSO: North Korea holding US citizen for allegedly spying


The court's liberal members defended the current practice, noting that the justices usually think twice before overturning such a long-standing precedent.

"You come here with a heavy burden," Justice Elena Kagan told the teachers' lawyer, Michael Carvin.

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 lead plaintiff is Rebecca Friedrichs, an elementary school teacher in Anaheim who quit the union in 2012.

SEE ALSO: 4 teens in custody in alleged group rape at NYC playground

A ruling in favor of 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.

The teachers union noted that state law requires the union to represent all workers during collective bargaining, the process in which unions negotiate contracts with employers on behalf of employees, regardless of whether they are members.

The non-union teachers appealed to the Supreme Court after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the union in November 2014.

SEE ALSO: Obama takes this year's State of Union to YouTube, Snapchat

Among public sector workers, 35.7 percent belong to unions, compared to 6.6 percent in the private sector, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Roughly three-quarters of the estimated 7.2 million public sector union members are in states without "right-to-work" laws.

A ruling in the case is due by the end of June.

The case is Friedrichs et al, v. California Teachers Association, et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 14-915.

Read Full Story

Sign up for Breaking News by AOL to get the latest breaking news alerts and updates delivered straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to our other newsletters

Emails may offer personalized content or ads. Learn more. You may unsubscribe any time.

From Our Partners