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 Law Spotlight
New York City Expands Paid Sick Leave Law With Creation Of ‘Safe Time’
November 13, 2017
On Monday, Nov. 6, newly re-elected Mayor Bill de Blasio signed into law “Intro. 1313-A,” a bill that amends and expands the coverage of New York City’s paid sick leave law. The bill renames the sick leave law as the “Earned Safe and Sick...
Employment Class Action Blog
Court Grants Summary Judgment For Employer In Tip Credit Collective Action
November 9, 2017
What? I Need a Valid Claim to Represent a Class?! With scores of collective actions being filed every month and many courts willing to issue conditional certification on even very weak claims, it’s easy to forget that, yes, it’s important...
Employment Class Action Blog
California Court Denies Conditional Certification of “Regular Rate” Overtime Case
November 6, 2017
With waves of cases already having addressed common targets for wage and hour litigation – assistant managers, healthcare workers, loan officers, donning and doffing claims, and the like – cases alleging more arcane claimed violations are...
Employment Class Action Blog
The Next Employment Class Action Lawsuit That Will Blindside You
November 2, 2017
Little-known Illinois statute now a source of class claims against employers Do any of your office systems involve fingerprint scans or facial recognition? If so, and if you have any Illinois business operations, you may soon become a...
Employment Law Spotlight
New California Law Prohibits Asking Job Applicants About Their Salary History
October 22, 2017
A new California law (AB 168) was signed by Governor Jerry Brown on October 12, 2017 that prohibits employers from inquiring about the salary histories of its job applicants. AB 168, which takes effect on January 1, 2018, and applies to...