SC Rules Against Unions

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by red states rule, Jun 15, 2007.

  1. red states rule

    red states rule Senior Member

    May 30, 2006
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Now, if only this law would apply to all union members who do not want their money being spent on candidates they do not support

    States can put rules on use of union fees
    By Amy Fagan
    June 15, 2007

    The Supreme Court yesterday ruled unanimously that states may require public-sector labor unions to get permission from workers before using their union fees for political activities.
    The 9-0 decision applies to government workers who have chosen not to be members of the union. About 21 states, including Washington, allow unions and government employers to enter into "agency-shop" agreements under which the union can collect fees from the nonmember workers whom it represents in labor negotiations.
    At the time the case was brought, however, Washington also required the union to get explicit prior consent from those nonmembers before using their fees for lobbying or other political purposes. The Washington Supreme Court ruled that this requirement violated the First Amendment and infringed on the union's "expressive associational rights," but the Supreme Court disagreed.
    "The notion that this modest limitation upon an extraordinary benefit violates the First Amendment is, to say the least, counterintuitive," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the court. Because it even would be constitutional for Washington state "to eliminate agency fees entirely," this "far less-restrictive limitation" is acceptable, he wrote.

Share This Page