Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-10328/USCOURTS-ca5-15-10328-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 740
Nature of Suit: Railway Labor Act
Cause of Action: 

---

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10328

JOSE SERNA; MARY RICHARDSON; ROBERTO CRUZ; SANTOS 

CORDERO; SARI MADERA; RALPH ANDERSON; WARREN LAMBERT; 

GREG HOFER; KENT HAND, 

 Plaintiffs - Appellants

v.

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA AFL-CIO, Union, 

 Defendant - Appellee

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Intervenor - Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:13-CV-2469

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and CLEMENT and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

We have reviewed the record, read the briefs, and heard arguments from 

both parties. We conclude that the two questions presented in this appeal are 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 11, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10328 Document: 00513586607 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/11/2016
No. 15-10328

2

governed by controlling Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit precedent. See Ry.

Employes’ Dep’t v. Hanson, 351 U.S. 225, 238 (1956) (allowing union shop 

provision of the Railway Labor Act (RLA)); Int’l Ass’n of Machinists v. Street, 

367 U.S. 740, 774 (1961) (allowing opt-out requirement under the RLA); Shea

v. Int’l Ass’n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, 154 F.3d 508, 513, 515 (5th 

Cir. 1998) (allowing opt-out requirement under the RLA).1 Accordingly, the 

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 

1 We note that when Serna filed his complaint, the Transport Workers Union of 

America required dissenting non-members to annually renew their objection in order to avoid 

paying support to the union’s political activities. We expressly held in Shea—which was

decided fifteen years prior to Serna’s complaint—that the First Amendment prohibits a union 

from requiring objectors to annually renew their objections. Because the union no longer 

requires an annual opt-out, Shea obliges us to uphold the union’s current opt-out policy.

 Case: 15-10328 Document: 00513586607 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/11/2016