DAVENPORT v. WASHINGTON EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

Legal Principle at Issue

(1) Do labor union officials have a 1st Amendment right to seize and use for political purposes the wages of nonmembers who have chosen not to become union members? (2) Does a state campaign finance law that prohibits labor unions and their officials from seizing and using the wages of nonmembers for partisan political campaigns without obtaining the non-members' affirmative consent violate the 1st Amendment rights of labor unions?

Action

Vacated and remanded. Petitioning party received a favorable disposition.

Facts/Syllabus

The National Labor Relations Act permits states to regulate their labor relationships with public employees. Many states authorize public-sector unions to negotiate agency-shop agreements that entitle a union to levy fees on employees who are not union members but whom the union represents in collective bargaining. However, the First Amendment prohibits public-sector unions from using objecting nonmembers’ fees for ideological purposes not germane to the union’s collective-bargaining duties, and such unions must therefore observe various procedural requirements to ensure that an objecting nonmember can keep his fees from being used for such purposes. 

Washington State allows public-sector unions to charge nonmembers an agency fee equivalent to membership dues and to have the employer collect that fee through payroll deductions. An initiative approved by state voters (hereinafter §760) requires a union to obtain the nonmembers’ affirmative authorization before using their fees for election-related purposes. Respondent, a public-sector union, sent a “Hudson packet” to all nonmembers twice a year detailing their right to object to the use of fees for nonchargeable expenditures; respondent held any disputed fees in escrow until the Hudson process was complete. In separate lawsuits, petitioners alleged that respondent had failed to obtain the affirmative authorization required by §760 before spending nonmembers’ agency fees for electoral purposes. In one lawsuit, the trial court found a §760 violation and awarded the state monetary and injunctive relief. In the other lawsuit, a judge held that §760 provided a private right of action, certified a class of nonmembers, and stayed the proceedings pending interlocutory appeal. The Washington Supreme Court held that although a nonmember’s failure to object after receiving the Hudson packet did not satisfy §760’s affirmative-authorization requirement, that requirement violated the First Amendment.