The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on January 21 on a lawsuit brought by Illinois homecare workers who want to avoid paying union fees for collective bargaining when they don’t want to belong to the union. the nonunion members pay a smaller agency fee to cover collective bargaining and are not forced to pay for other activities and policies that they may not support. The workers claimed that the agency fee still violates their First Amendment rights. (The National Law Journal, January 21, 2014, by Tony Mauro)
In 1977 in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, the court ruled that all workers, union or not, had to supporting bargaining by paying dues. The case may hinge on how the judges decide on whether the union activities are mainly about public policy or in improving the working conditions of workers. (SCOTUSblog, January 21, 2014, by Lyle Denniston)
Conservative columnist George Will, The Washington Post, January 17, 2014, assails Illinois law supporting the agency fees, “Illinois’s scheme is a trifecta of constitutional violations. It violates the right of free association of those who are coerced into a fees-paying relationship with unions — a right that, the Supreme Court has held, ‘plainly presupposes a freedom not to associate.’ Not to associate, for example, with groups whose expressive activities are offensive to those who are coerced into joining the groups. Second, those coerced into unions are compelled to subsidize with their dues union speech with which they may strenuously disagree. Third, after being transformed by government fiat into government employees, they are denied the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances in their own voices, having been forced to allow a union to petition for them.”