High court limits union use of nonmember fees
Labor & Employment
[##_1L|1232595256.jpg|width="131" height="91" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously upheld a Washington state law that restricts how labor unions can use fees collected from nonmembers for political purposes.
The high court ruled the restrictions covering labor unions for public employees do not violate the union's constitutional free-speech rights to engage in political advocacy.
Washington voters in 1992 adopted a campaign finance law that required unions to get the consent of each worker before spending fees on political activity, such as campaigning for or against various measures.
The law also required the unions to refund the fee to nonmembers who oppose the political activity proposed by the union.
The case involved the Washington Education Association, the state's largest teachers union. About 4,000 of the more than 70,000 people it represents choose not to be members, according to the union, which said Washington is the only state in the nation with such a law.
Lawyers for the state and the Bush administration urged the Supreme Court to uphold the law because it was designed to regulate campaign financing in state elections. The high court agreed in an opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia.
"The purpose of the voters of Washington was undoubtedly the general one of protecting the integrity of elections by limiting electoral spending in certain ways," Scalia said.
"Quite obviously, no suppression of ideas is afoot, since the union remains as free as any other entity to participate in the electoral process with all available funds other than" those fees by nonmembers who refuse to give their approval, Scalia said.
Related listings
-
Labor organization asks NC to repeal bargaining ban
Labor & Employment 04/04/2007The state of North Carolina is violating international freedom of association labor standards by prohibiting governmental entities from bargaining with unions, according to a decision released Tuesday by the International Labor Organization (ILO), th...
-
California State University professors vote to strike
Labor & Employment 03/28/2007On March 21, the California State University faculty voted overwhelmingly—94 percent—to authorize a strike for increased wages and benefits. The workers, represented by the California Faculty Association, have been working without a contract for over...
-
Labor Lawsuits Blast Berger Commission
Labor & Employment 03/27/2007A group of public employee unions today filed lawsuits in opposition to the recommendations of the State's Berger Commission, which last year offered that multiple hospitals across New York need to be closed in order to control rising costs. The laws...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.