Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-1121c4d6.pdf
Page Number: 39.0

6 

KNOX v. SERVICE EMPLOYEES 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

ployees who raised a general objection at the beginning of 
the year.  The union has honored their objections by sub-
tracting from their special payments the same 44% that it
subtracts  from  each  of  their  ordinary  monthly  payments.
App. 309.  And we know that the special assessment here
did not even work temporary constitutional harm.  That is 
because  audited  figures  showed  that  the  union’s  total
nonchargeable (e.g., political) expenses for that year ended 
up  as  a  lower  percentage  of  total  expenses  than  the  pre-
vious  year.  Hence  the  objecting  nonmembers  ended  up
being  charged  too  little,  not  too  much,  even  with  the  spe-
cial assessment thrown into the mix. 

Let  me  put  the  point  more  specifically.  The  union’s 
June  2005  Hudson  notice  said  that  the  union  would 
charge  objecting  nonmembers  roughly  56%  of  the  dues
paid  by  union  members.    See  App.  102.  That  56%  figure
represented the chargeable portion of expenditures accord-
ing  to  the  audited  figures  from  2004.  Thus,  if  the  fee 
charged  to  a  union  member  pursuant  to  the  2005  notice 
was $400, the fee charged to an objecting nonmember was
$224.  The  union  similarly  prorated  the  special  assess-
ment  charging  objecting  nonmembers  56%  of  the  assess-
ment  it  imposed  upon  members.  Thus,  if  the  special
assessment amounted to $50 for a member, it amounted to 
$28  for  an  objecting  nonmember.    And  total  dues  in  this 
example would have amounted to $450 for a member and 
$252 for a nonmember. 

In the event, the union’s chargeable expenses for 2005—
including the funds raised pursuant to the special assess-
ment—amounted  to  more  than  56%  of  its  total  expendi-
tures.  The  auditor’s  reports  show  that  the  union’s  total
Id., 
expenditures  in  2005  amounted  to  $40,045,409. 
at  166.  Chargeable  expenses  amounted  to  $27,552,746,
which works out to 69% of the total budget.  Ibid.  Thus, a 
substantially  larger  portion  of  the  union’s  2005  spending 
was  chargeable  (69%)  than  it  had  been  in  2004  (56%).