Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-1466_2b3j.pdf
Page Number: 46.0

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

41 

Opinion of the Court 

Category 

Total Expense 

Chargeable 
Expense 

Salary and
Benefits 

Office Printing,
Supplies, and
Advertising 

Postage and
Freight 

Telephone 

Convention 
Expense 

$14,718,708 

$11,830,230 

$148,272 

$127,959 

$373,509 

$268,107 

$214,820 

$192,721 

$268,855 

$268,855 

See App. to Pet. for Cert. 35a–36a.

How  could  any  nonmember  determine  whether  these
numbers  are  even  close  to  the  mark  without  launching  a 
legal challenge and retaining the services of attorneys and 
accountants?  Indeed, even with such services, it would be 
a laborious and difficult task to check these figures.26 

The  Union  respondent  argues  that  challenging  its
chargeability  determinations  is  not  burdensome  because
the  Union  pays  for  the  costs  of  arbitration,  see  Brief  for
Union  Respondent  10–11,  but  objectors  must  still  pay  for
the  attorneys  and  experts  needed  to  mount  a  serious
challenge.  And  the  attorney’s  fees  incurred  in  such  a 
proceeding  can  be  substantial.    See,  e.g.,  Knox  v.  Chiang, 
2013 WL 2434606, *15 (ED Cal., June 5, 2013) (attorney’s
fees in Knox exceeded $1 million).  The Union respondent’s 
suggestion  that  an  objector  could  obtain  adequate  review 
without  even  showing  up  at  an  arbitration,  see  App.  to 
Pet. for Cert. 40a–41a, is therefore farfetched. 

—————— 

26 For  this  reason,  it  is  hardly  surprising  that  chargeability  issues
have  not  arisen  in  many  Court  of  Appeals  cases.    See  post,  at  22 
(KAGAN, J., dissenting).