Employee Has Right to Object to Dues for Union Activities
July 3, 2001
Andrew W. Stephenson- Washington
On February 17, 2001, President George W. Bush issued an Executive Order
requiring all federal agencies to include in their contracts a provision that
would obligate the contracting employer to post notices in the workplace
advising its employees of rights established by the United States Supreme Court
in Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988). Thereafter, the General
Counsel's office of the National Labor Relations Board, on April 26, 2001,
published guidelines for use by its regions in responding to questions about
Beck and the executive order. This article summarizes some of the more important
issues raised by the Supreme Court, executive order and guidelines.
The National Labor Relations Act allows a union to enter into union security
agreements with employers that require the employees within a bargaining unit to
become "members" of the union after the 30th day (7th day in the
construction industry) following their hire.
No one must be a full "member" of a union in order to maintain a
job, but all employees subject to a union security agreement can be required to
pay union dues and fees. States that have exercised their statutory option to be
right-to-work states (including Florida, Georgia, Texas, Virginia and others)
prohibit employees from being required to pay union dues and fees under a
"union shop" clause unless they are employed on a federal enclave.
The significance of the Beck case is that the Supreme Court held that, even
in non-right-to-work states, the employers and unions may not permit a union,
over the objections of the employee, from expending dues and fees collected on
activities unrelated to collective bargaining, contract administration or
grievance adjustment.
Under Beck, the union has the initial obligation to inform the employee of
the above-stated rights. Once an employee objects to paying the portion of dues
that covers "nonrepresentational" functions, the union must cease
charging the objecting employee for that portion of the dues. The objecting
employee has a right to be informed how the union calculated the portion
covering nonrepresentational activities and the employee has a right to
challenge the union's calculation.
The NLRB Office of the General Counsel has taken the position that lobbying
expenses generally are nonrepresentational, but the Board itself has yet to rule
on this issue. The Board has found that organizing expenses, at least within the
same competitive market as that of the bargaining unit employee, are
representational and may be charged to an objecting employee.
As mentioned above, the Beck case establishes that the initial burden of
notifying employees falls on the union. However, President Bush's Executive
Order creates a contractual duty on the employer/government contractor to post
workplace notices as proscribed by the Order.
For more information please contact Andrew W. Stephenson at 1-888-688-8500 or
at astephen@hklaw.com.
Related Practices