Legal Document

523 U.S. 866118 S.Ct. 1761140 L.Ed.2d 1070 AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, Petitioner,v.ROBERT A. MILLER et al. No. 97-428. Supreme Court of the United States Argued March 23, 1998. Decided May 26, Syllabus * Petitioner Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA or Union), a private-sector labor organization covered by Railway Labor Act (RLA), represents, as exclusive bargaining agent, pilots employed Delta Lines (Delta). The collective-bargaining agreement between ALPA and includes an "agency shop'' clause that requires nonunion to pay monthly service charge for representing them. For 1992, first year collected fee'' under agency-shop agreement, Union ultimately determined 19 percent its expenses were not germane collective bargaining. Accordingly, agency fee amounted 81 members' dues. Alleging had overstated percentage expenditures genuinely attributable "germane'' activities, respondents, 153 pilots, challenged in this federal-court action manner which calculated fees. Under ALPA's "Policies Procedures Applicable Agency Fees,'' adopted comply with "impartial decisionmaker'' requirement set forth Teachers v. Hudson, 475 292, 310, 106 1066, 1077-1078, 89 232, who object calculation may request arbitration procedures devised American Arbitration (AAA). When 174 (including 91 respondents) filed timely objections 1992 agency-fee calculation, treated objects referred them AAA resolution single, consolidated proceeding. arbitrator declined stay deference court proceeding, sustained substantial part. District then granted motion summary judgment, concluding, inter alia, seeking challenge must exhaust arbitral remedies before proceeding court. Reversing, Appeals found no legal basis requiring objectors arbitrate challenges when they agreed do so. Having arbitrator's decision was longer part picture, appellate remanded case Court. Held: union adopts process Hudson's requirement, have procedure be required remedy challenging union's action. Pp. ____-____. (a) Section 2, Eleventh, RLA allows employers unions conclude shop agreements. such arrangements, nonmembers their fair share necessarily reasonably incurred performing duties employee representative dealing employer on labor-management issues. Ellis Clerks, 466 435, 448, 104 1883, 1892, 80 428. To avoid constitutional shoals, however, cannot compelled costs unrelated those duties. See, e.g., id., at 448-455, S.Ct., 1892-1896. In public-sector limitations use fees prompted directly First Amendment, held provide three procedural protections workers calculation: sufficient information gauge fee's propriety, U.S., 306, 1075-1076; "a prompt opportunity amount impartial decisionmaker,'' 1078; escrowing any "reasonably dispute'' while is pending. Ibid. (b) parties Appeals' determination safeguards transfer fully employment relations governed RLA. turns question whether pursuing claims federal answers "no,'' rejects extend discretionary exhaustion-of-remedies doctrine, see McCarthy Madigan, 503 140, 144, 112 1081, 1085-1086, 117 291, arbitration. A principal purpose doctrine-allowing agencies, courts, primary responsibility programs Congress has charged administer, 145, 1086-1087-is relevant here: seeks exhaustion established private party, administrative Congress. As rule, matter contract, party ordinarily submit dispute he so submit. E.g., Steelworkers Warrior & Gulf Nav. Co., 363 574, 582, 1347, 1352-1353, 4 1409. ALPA, it true, acted Hudson rather than out own unconstrained choice. But advance swift, fair, final settlement objectors' rights, 307, 1076, compel pursue resists reading might frustrate very purpose. assertion efficiency served proceed arbitration, thereby gaining definition scope dispute, overstates difficulties entailed holding hearing without preparatory answered conscientious management pretrial guard against abuse, judicially imposed requirement. Genuine Union's interest avoiding multiple proceedings be, does overwhelm resistance did consent, election immediately adjudication rights. 108 F.3d 1415, affirmed. GINSBURG, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C. O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, JJ., joined. BREYER, dissenting opinion, STEVENS, Jerry D. Anker, Washington, DC, petitioner. Raymond J. LaJeunesse, Fairfax, VA, respondents. Justice GINSBURG 1 An arrangement permits union, obliged act behalf all employees unit, representation. purposes spend paid nonmembers, are circumscribed Amendment (when public involved) National Relations (NLRA) (RLA) subject provisions involved). Chicago 232 (1986), we public-employee accord decisionmaker.'' Id., 1078. 2 RLA, acknowledges bound Hudson. endeavored referring disputes neutral arbitrator. now us, 1992. urged challengers judicial remedies. Columbia Circuit resisting once We hold, Appeals, need never 3 most commercial air carriers, including November 1991, amended include, clause. That clause, similar agreements other each pilot member "service contribution administration [the agreement] representation employee.'' App. 31. On December 12, five Columbia. Their complaint unlawful face. (Three original plaintiffs, plus 150 subsequently intervened, respondents here; two plaintiffs dismissed from reasons issue resolve. also grounds pertinent here.) unsuccessfully moved preliminary injunction implementation arrangement, began collecting January 1, 5 members dues 2.35 pilot's earnings. determined, final, audited "Statement Germane Nongermane Expenses'' (SGNE) adjusted equal paid. 6 October 8, some months after begun collect fees, amend add count fee. They alleged, activities. August 1993. pilots' facial later resolved favor judgment (a contest appeal). Thus, only claim us. 7 (AAA) resolve disputes. 69-70. One hundred seventy-four receiving SGNE. requests AAA. 15, 1993, appointed 8 included here. (The 62 intervened lawsuit but arbitration.) Preferring context ongoing action, respondent-objectors asked suspend arbitrator, defer litigation. 106. After denied enjoin 111-114, respondents' counsel entered "conditional appearance'' proceedings. hearings January, February, 1994. He part, although concluded "nongermane'' made up 21.49 budget, determined. Pet. Cert. 71a-115a, 158a-161a. 9 issued his decision, Granting motion, 26a-31a. held, join decision. 32a. ruled, qualified clear-error review fact findings de novo 31a. Determining committed error law clear fact, 10 reversed. 1415 (1997). "no basis'' unless (as not). 1421 (emphasis deleted). It therefore "the [was] picture,'' reason "must remanded.'' 1422. certiorari, 522 ----, 118 554, 139 396 (1997), limited objector union-provided bringing court, Courts reached differing conclusions.1 II 11 Because "common carrier engaged interstate foreign commerce,'' 45 U.S.C. §181, governs relationship ALPA. agreements.2 statutory authorization aims problem "free riders-employees unit whose [is] perform functions, refus[e] contribute cost thereof.'' 447, 428 (1984). "necessarily issues.'' 1892. questions arise adopt contrary interpretation objecting employees. See 1892-1896; Clerks Allen, 373 113, 121, 83 1158, 1163, 235 (1963) (§2, distinguishes political expenditures,'' contribute, "germane bargaining,'' may); Machinists Street, 367 740, 768-769, 1784, 1800, 1141 (1961) ("§2, Eleventh construed deny unions, over employee's objection, power exacted funds support causes opposes''); Communications Workers Beck, 487 735, 762-763, 2641, 2657-2658, 101 634 (1988) (same apply NLRA). 12 rule-based explicitly Constitution-applies employment. Abood Detroit Bd. Ed., 431 209, 97 1782, 1798, 52 261 (1977), upheld constitutionality government workers' representatives. explained, imposition "is constitutionally justified legislative assessment important system Congress,'' " [t]he same interests . presumptively support'' arrangements sector. 222, 225, 1792-1793, 1794. 13 assessed said Abood, "used finance bargaining, contract administration, grievance adjustment.'' 225-226, cautioned, view presence state right "prevent spending candidates express views representative.'' 234, 1799. Lehnert Ferris Faculty Assn., 500 507, 519, 111 1950, 1959, 114 572 (1991), relied both cases hold (1) "germane' activity; (2) government's vital policy peace riders'; (3) significantly burdening free speech inherent allowance shop.'' 14 case, Three safeguards, declared, essential "minimize infringement'' nonmembers' rights identify impact assessment] [their] interests,'' 303, 1074: Employees receive "sufficient propriety fee,'' give objector's escrow B 15 requirements F.3d, 1419, determination.3 turn presented: action? 16 concurring White (joined Chief Burger) "yes.'' stated: [I]f provides complies specified our should entitled insist exhausted resorting courts.'' 311, 1078 (concurring opinion). Court's comment unelaborated assertion, remains live reach. recognized "Justice raised legitimate practical concern,'' forcing into put process.'' original). agree, decline read protects cost-delayed access court-they wish pay. 17 urges extension doctrine Brief (citing 1086, 291 (1992) (" [W]here clearly exhaustion, sound discretion governs.'')).4 [T]he recognizes notion, grounded Congress' delegation authority coordinate branches Government, ought administer.'' McCarthy, 1086. party. Ordinarily, "arbitration submit.'' 1353, 1409 (1960); Options Chicago, Inc. Kaplan, 514 938, 942, 115 1920, 1923, 131 985 (1995) ("a will normally court's about merits dispute''). 18 Union, protect affording forum can swiftly; nothing purports remedy. 1076 ("The employee, affected itself bears burden objecting, addressed expeditious, objective manner.''). Indeed, emphasis speedy weighs even through intended prerequisite consideration nonmember challenges. 146, 1087 [A]dministrative pursued if litigant's immediate outweigh autonomy designed further.'') (internal quotation marks omitted). resist purpose, Against these concerns, stresses asserted gains first. asserts: "It difficult conceive how could fairly try ab initio, given whatsoever challenge.'' Reply 6-7. Arbitration, view, serve useful role defining dispute. 21-23; 4-7. 20 raising retains proof.'' 1075. And internal remedies, preserve subsequent relief "indicat[ing] specific objects.'' 241, 1802 stating "nonmember's "burden' simply obligation make objection known,'' n. 16, plaintiff file generally phrased complaint, sit back require prove "germaneness'' clue "which thousands expenditures'' oppose. 4. challengers, like civil litigants, known degree specificity appropriate stage litigation reaches: dismiss; judgment; conference. 21 notice enable that, improperly classified germane. 306-307, 1075-1076. With notice, additional developed reasonable discovery, expected point classes she finds questionable. Although establish germane, shifted proof warrant blocking instance, preference. answer concern lies 22 Moreover, would reduce courts uncertain. extent sustain traverse layers one.5 Furthermore, operates inexpensive, swift sure errors, avail themselves Cf. Patsy Board Regents Fla., 457 496, 513, 102 2557, 2566, 73 172 (1982) (under market' system'' "litigants truly appear cheaper, more efficient, effective''). 23 may, nonetheless, face prospect defending simultaneously fora. note lack means limit expense disruption occasioned challenges: single example, district 28 §§1404, 1407. genuine rights.6 agree procedure, 24 stated, 25 Affirmed. 26 whom STEVENS joins, dissenting. 27 collection include adequate explanation fee, decisionmaker, amounts pending.'' added). 29 added bind 308, 21, 1077, ("arbitrator's preclusive effect §1983 action''). ante, __-__, (treating "transfer[ing] fully'' one). 30 I implying approval, disapproval, rule initial participation "prompt,'' non -binding, White, joined Burger, specifically stated 31 "if 32 upon compliance procedure-as long nonbinding conducted expeditiously "impartial'' requires. 1077-1078. 33 majority quotes approval statement White's concern, ""practical,''' lacked ""legal basis.''' Ante, __ (quoting (C.A.D.C.1997)) itself, rests, basic position. Those rest solely employees, but, rather, grow effort balance distinct interests. 34 benefit. 1793, (1977) (imposition Congress''); 122, 1163-1164, ("no decree proper appeared likely infringe unions' expend uniform exactions union-shop agreement''); 761-764, 1796-1798, (1961); 520-521, 1959-1960, (1991). paying "non-germane'' activity, activity promote ideological non-member share. Lehnert, supra, 515-519, 1956-1959; 233-236, 1798-1800; 118-121, 1161-1163; 765-769, 798-1800. 35 This interpreted statutes, light Constitution's requirements, "protect both'' "interests maximum possible undue impingement one other.'' 773, makes ""must''' seek ""objective''' ""preven[t] compulsory subsidization thereto restricting ability every activities.''' 302, 1074 237, 1800) mandatory, nonbinding, here satisfies objectives, elaboration mandate: 36 First, consider perspective. first'' seems because lowers resolving manageable. illustrates, different groups dissenters motivations forums. Without simultaneously. Judge perhaps discovery requests, obtaining somewhat information, arguments, operating rules evidence, exercising judgments (each knowledge other), well determine differently complex expenditure relationships, reaching different, conflicting, conclusions. Amicus Education says "would expensive burdensome imaginable.'' Curiae 14. AFL-CIO adds "costs litigation'' (which involve $50 individual dissenter, Tr. Oral Arg. 10) "can easily consume receipts.'' 14, 5. [g]enuine'' "concern'' "its fora.'' __. 37 Second, perspective employee. rejecting help few few, way offset corresponding harm caused Union. mean serious delay, begin promptly expeditiously. 1076. satisfaction less ideology desire minimize Gilpin AFSCME, 875 F.2d 1310, 1313 (C.A.7 1989) (noting many riders'' lowest possible); Weaver Univ. Cincinnati, 970 1523, 1530 (C.A.6 1992) (same); Kidwell Transportation Int'l 946 283, 304-306 (C.A.4 1991) (same). 38 Nor trying prejudice cause remaining unsatisfied objectors. deprive money brief time, disputed remain unspent during 305, 1075, Nonbinding leaves press action-if arbitration's result dissatisfied. And, conceded oral argument, judge though informed special weight. 20-21; Skidmore Swift 323 134, 65 161, 164, L.Ed. 124 (1944) (administrative agency, interpretations, "power persuade, lacking control''). words, briefly delayed, clean slate. Hensler, Court-Ordered Arbitration: Alternative View, U. Chi. Legal Forum 399, 401 (1990) (describing differences mandatory -binding calculations, traditional binding arbitration). 39 From courts' too, helpful. Insofar settles matters parties' satisfaction, avoids unnecessary, time-consuming, investigation highly accounts allocations. 1164 surrounding "judicially administered relief'' objectors, compared "internal remedy''); 240, 40 upshot "prevent[s] activity'' unduly "restricting ability'' Consequently, neither nor statute, prohibits insistence rule. 41 fear led conclusion analogies my govern circumstances analogizes often contracts, where legally anchored consent parties. "consent'' justification Rather, anchor (indeed, obligation) impose permit infringement explained above why requirements. If needs analogy, find it, consensual §§651-658 (authorizing refer certain types actions arbitration); ADR Local Rules 2-3, 4-2 (ND Cal.1998); Federal Judicial Center, Court-Annexed Ten (1990). 42 describes proposed "extension doctrine.'' particular offers beside point. obligations rested substantive competing demands Amendment. decided craft mechanism resolution. Exhaustion principles prevent doing Why elaborating permitting kind us? 43 matter. refers "pilots proceed[ing] court.'' decide, await expeditious proceeds, discovery. __, 6. Should conclusion, able take advantage narrowing issues nonmandatory produced. Doing alleviate concerns expressed opinion. __-__. 44 Even so, us prior recourse form believe consistent with, of, dissent. syllabus constitutes been prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Timber Lumber 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. Compare Lancaster Assn. Int'l, 76 1509, 1522 (C.A.10 1996) (exhaustion required), Knight Kenai Peninsula Borough School Dist., 807, 816 (C.A.9 1997) Bromley Michigan Ed. Assn.-NEA, 82 686, 694 §2, 64 Stat. 1238, §152, part: "Notwithstanding chapter, statute States, Territory thereof, State, carriers defined chapter organizations duly designated authorized represent accordance shall permitted- agreements, requiring, condition continued employment, within sixty days following beginning effective date whichever later, become class: Provided, respect membership available terms conditions applicable terminated failure tender periodic dues, initiation assessments (not fines penalties) uniformly acquiring retaining membership.'' 516, 1957, (1991) guidance regarding what countenance realm activities assessments.''); 555, 1978 (SCALIA, part) ("good treat'' reflecting articulated Abood). cf. Price International UAW, 927 88, 92 (C.A.2 (Hudson's "heightened safeguards'' involving (NEA) argues ripeness. Illegality depends purposes, NEA maintains, fees; hence, filing suit until ruled released escrow. 18-20. Petitioner, reply brief, endorses NEA's argument. 16-17. contention, inconsistent (1986). There, rejected position "because 100% completely risk dissenters' contributions used improperly, eliminates valid remedy.'' 309, 1077. entire remained throughout (who deprived property pending outcome dispute) independent, enforceable objections. Inevitably limiting utility relieving task adjudicating character characteristic dissent centrally relies. post, Our recognition detract Landis North 299 248, 254-255, 57 163, 166, (1936) incidental control disposition docket economy time counsel, litigants. How best done calls exercise weigh maintain balance.''). ***

Classification Label: 6