Public Sector Unions Dodge a Bullet on Non-Member Fees

Alerts / March 30, 2016

Public sector union officials and their allies will breathe easier as a challenge to the collection of “agency fees” from non-members was rejected by a deadlocked United States Supreme Court earlier this week. In a per curiam ruling issued on March 29, the Court affirmed the ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the matter of Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association on the basis of a 4–4 vote.[1] The ruling comes as a disappointing – if expected – blow to proponents of public employees’ free association rights in the wake of the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February.

Friedrichs concerned a challenge by a group of California teachers to the union’s practice of collecting agency fees for its activities related to collective bargaining from teachers who did not wish to be union members. As we previously reported, the Friedrichs plaintiffs asked the Court to reverse its decision in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education,[2] arguing that collective bargaining activity by public sector unions is inherently political, making compulsory union fees an impermissible encroachment on employees’ rights of free association. Justice Samuel Alito’s ruling in a 2014 case was widely read to invite such an argument.[3]

The 4–4 ruling leaves the underlying Ninth Circuit decision in favor of the union in place but sets no new national precedent. The Center for Individual Rights, the nonprofit organization representing the Friedrichs plaintiffs, announced it will petition the Court to rehear the case.[4] If granted, the Court would likely hear the case during the October 2016 term, presumably with the vacancy created by Scalia’s death filled. As has been widely reported, Senate leadership has pledged not to act on President Obama’s recent nomination of D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Merrick Garland to fill that vacancy. Justice Scalia’s eventual replacement may impact the continuing viability of the Abood decision endorsing public sector union agency fees. Accordingly, the ability of public sector unions to collect compulsory fees from employees who may or may not support the unions’ views appears to be safe for the time being in the more than 20 states that do not have right-to-work laws.

If you have any questions about this alert, please contact any member of BakerHostetler's Labor Relations team.

Authorship credit: Travis I. Owsley

[1] No. 14-915, --- S. Ct. ---, 2016 WL 1191684 (U.S. Mar. 29, 2016) (slip op.).
[2] 431 U.S. 209 (1977).
[3] See Harris v. Quinn, 134 S. Ct. 2618, 2632 (2014).
[4] Press Release, Center for Individual Rights, Supreme Court Split on Union Fees (Mar. 29, 2016).

Baker & Hostetler LLP publications are intended to inform our clients and other friends of the firm about current legal developments of general interest. They should not be construed as legal advice, and readers should not act upon the information contained in these publications without professional counsel. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you written information about our qualifications and experience.

Related Services


In The Blogs

Previous Next
Employment Class Action Blog
Supreme Court Overrules Sixth Circuit (Again) In Class Action Dispute Over Retiree Medical Benefits
February 21, 2018
Is Yard-Man really dead this time? This issue should never have arisen, the Supreme Court should not have had to address it in 2015, and it shouldn’t have required Supreme Court attention a second time just three years later. But it did.  ...
Employment Class Action Blog
Courts Deny Certification for Adequacy of Representation in Second Class Action
February 16, 2018
One of the tactics in the current plaintiffs’ wage and hour playbook is to bring a second claim after settlement of an initial class or collective action lawsuit. In these cases, the second set of claims is purportedly brought on behalf of...
Employment Class Action Blog
Faulty Statistics Lead to Decertification of California Wage and Hour Case
February 9, 2018
Nearly four years ago, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in the case of Duran v. U.S. Bank National Ass’n, 59 Cal. 4th 1 (2014), in which it virtually catalogued the many problems inherent in the plaintiffs’ statistical case...
Employment Class Action Blog
Minnesota Court Cuts Proposed Attorney Fee Award From $3.2 Million to $600,000 in Off-the-Clock Case
February 7, 2018
In 2014, five law firms brought a claim for alleged off-the-clock work. As discovery revealed, the claims all arose out of conduct involving a single shift supervisor at a single restaurant, and the conduct was disputed at that. Although...
Employment Law Spotlight
Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Will Be in Effect Before You Know It
January 8, 2018
As you may know, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker signed the Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act in July, expanding state protections for pregnant women and new mothers, and setting new rules for employers with six or more...