Legal Document

475 U.S. 292 106 S.Ct. 1066 89 L.Ed.2d 232 CHICAGO TEACHERS UNION, LOCAL NO. 1, AFT, AFL-CIO, et al., Petitionersv.Annie Lee HUDSON al. No. 84-1503. Argued Dec. 2, 1985. Decided March 4, 1986. Syllabus Petitioner Chicago Teachers Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of Board Education's educational employees since 1967. Approximately 95% are members Union. Until 1982, members' dues financed entire cost Union's collective bargaining and contract administration, nonmembers received benefits representation without making any contributions to its cost. In an attempt solve this "free rider" problem, entered into agreement requiring deduct "proportionate share payments" from nonmembers' paychecks. The determined that share" assessed on was union dues, computed basis financial records. also established a procedure for considering objections deductions. After deduction made, nonmember could object by writing President, objection would then meet three-stage procedure: (1) Executive Committee consider notify objector within 30 days decision; (2) if disagreed with decision appealed another days, objection; (3) continued protest after Board's decision, President select arbitrator. If sustained at stage, remedy be reduction in future deductions rebate objector. Respondent objecting brought suit Federal District Court, challenging grounds it violated their First Amendment rights freedom expression association Fourteenth due process permitted use proportionate shares impermissible purposes. Court rejected challenges upheld procedure. Appeals reversed, holding constitutionally inadequate. court defense subsequent adoption arrangement whereby voluntarily placed all objectors' agency fees escrow cured constitutional defects. Held: 1. Under shop agreement, procedural safeguards necessary prevent compulsory subsidization ideological activity nonunion who thereto while same time not restricting union's ability require employee contribute activities. fact employees' protected requires carefully tailored minimize shop's infringement those rights. And must have fair opportunity identify impact assert meritorious claim. Pp. 301-304. 2. Here, original contained three First, failed risk might temporarily used Second, provide adequate information about which advance calculated. third, reasonably prompt impartial decisionmaker. employee, whose affected itself bears burden objecting, is entitled his addressed expeditious, fair, objective manner. 304-309. 3. did cure these Two still remain—failure explanation 309-310. 743 F.2d 1187 (CA7 1984), affirmed. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. WHITE, filed concurring opinion, BURGER, C.J., joined, post, p. 311. Laurence Gold, Washington, D.C., petitioners. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Manassas, Va., respondents. Justice STEVENS 1 Abood v. Detroit Education, 431 209, 97 1782, 52 261 (1977), "we found no barrier between municipality teacher's insofar as required every unit pay service fee defray costs bargaining, grievance adjustment. union, however, not, consistently Constitution, collect dissenting sums support causes germane duties agent." Ellis Railway Clerks, 466 435, 447, 104 1883, 1892, 80 428 (1984). case primarily concerned need "to define line expenditures help sufficiently related justify being imposed dissenters." Ibid. contrast, concerns constitutionality adopted Union, approval draw respond manner drawn. 2 * acted continuously 27,500 December administration. Nonmembers contribution 3 made several proposals "fair fee" clause labor contract. Because Illinois School Code expressly authorize such provision, until General Assembly amended 1981.1 following year, Education paychecks nonmembers. new contractual provision authorized specify amount payment; stipulated exceed dues. indemnify action taken implement provision. 4 For 1982-1983 school At time, were $17.35 per month teachers $12.15 other covered employees; corresponding checks thus amounted $16.48 $11.54 each 10 months payable. 5 officials records fiscal year ending June 30, 1982. They identified unrelated administration (which they estimated $188,549.82). divided income ($4,103,701.58) produce percentage 4.6%; figure rounded off 5% "cushion" cover inadvertent errors. 6 Before raise objection. first payroll deduction. decision. Third, arbitrator list maintained Education. arbitration, and, there multiple objections, consolidated. stage procedure, immediate 7 October formally requested begin advised hearing had objections. accepted determination questioning method calculation asking review supporting it. began calculation, or procedures. undertake certain informational efforts. It asked member delegates schools distribute flyers, display posters, inform deductions, invite join amnesty past fines. described procedures issue newspaper, distributed 8 Three nonmembers—Annie Hudson, K. Celeste Campbell, Walter Sherrill—sent identical letters stating believed using part salary purposes demanding reduced. A fourth Beverly Underwood—objected her paycheck. response four briefly explained how proportionate-share calculated, enclosed copy Implementation Plan, concluded advice "any you may file" processed compliance None referred Committee. Only Hudson wrote second letter; request detailed answered invitation make appointment "informational conference" office, she further effort invoke procedures; instead, challenged court. II 9 1983, nonmembers, joined sent letters,2 naming defendants, officials, Board, members. objected principal reasons: association; rights; purposes.3 challenges. 573 F.Supp. 1505 (ND Ill.1983). noted passed initial threshold earlier Seventh Circuit subject because fair; represented good-faith Union; unduly cumbersome. "least restrictive means" protect protecting legitimate interest promptly obtaining argument deprived plaintiffs property accept plaintiffs' analogy cases predeprivation hearings. Finally, refused reach contention were, fact, purposes.4 only two (Hudson Underwood) validly invoked procedure; rebates sustained; assessment permissible funds should await outcome 11 posture changed significantly Appeals. longer focused claim particular inappropriate; concentrated attack determine objections.5 modified position. Instead defending dissenters' escrow, thereby avoided danger respondents' violated. 12 judgment reversing 1984). All judges agreed Constitution follow protects compelled subsidize political activities process, inadequate, allowed temporary money violate unconstitutional. Judge Flaum declined questions discussed majority. 13 Specifically, majority category included even characterized "political ideological." unnecessary deemed inadequate deciding because, view, statute limited representational expenses. However, conclusion derived possible "liberty" forced views, but negative dimension association. 14 Determining existing "must go back drawing board," id., 1196, suggested "constitutional minimum" revised include notice, administrative before some state local agency—the incorporate usual evidentiary hearings agencies—and right judicial agency's combination internal arbitration unlikely satisfy requirements given nature issues decided stake decided." Ibid.6 15 commitment continue future, indicated terms events, "[t]he cannot left entirely up Union." Id., 1197. 16 importance case, divergent approaches courts issue,7 led us grant certiorari, 472 1007, 105 2700, 86 716 (1985). We affirm Appeals, we do find resolve opinion. III 17 recognized "has upon interests," 222, S.Ct., 1792-1793, well "interfere way employee's associate advancement ideas, refrain doing so, he sees fit," ibid. See 255, 1809-1810 (POWELL, judgment). nevertheless unconstitutional public employer designate employees, condition employment, negotiating administering agreement.8 held, "prevent spending candidates express views representative." 234, 1799.9 18 question presented whether approved adequately basic distinction drawn Abood. "[T]he devise preventing activities." 237, 1800. 19 Procedural achieve reasons. although government peace strong enough "agency shop"10 notwithstanding rights, infringement.11 employee—the individual affected—must governmental interests claim.12 20 U.S., 443, 1889 (1984), that, under Labor Act, "pure approach inadequate." approach, refunds entitled, "the obtains involuntary loan objects." 444, 1890. possibility "readily available alternatives, and/or interest-bearing accounts," ibid., but, sufficient strike down 21 survives scrutiny, either sufficient, defect. turn.13 IV 22 initially considered fundamental flaws.14 Ellis, merely offers dissenters does avoid improper purpose. exact establishing will used, temporarily, finance bargaining." Abood, 244, 1804 (concurring opinion). dissenter diminish concern. For, whatever amount, quality propagation oppose clear. emphasized point quoting comments Thomas Jefferson James Madison tyrannical character forcing "three pence" "propagation opinions disbelieves."15 exaction followed equal improperly expended 23 "advance dues" provided share. reiterated raising objection, retains proof: " 'Since unions possess facts proportion total can considerations fairness compel they, bear proving proportion.' 239-240, n. 40, 1801-1802, Clerks Allen, 373 113, 122, 83 1158, 1164, 235 (1963).16 Basic fairness, concern stake, dictate potential objectors gauge propriety fee. Leaving dark source fee—and them order receive information—does careful distinctions Abood.17 24 identifying benefit members—and fairly charged fee—the admittedly An acknowledgment annual disclosure reasons why 95%.18 25 defective Although so specified past,19 now conclude requirement necessary. manner.20 26 requirement. As observed, "most conspicuous feature start finish controlled interested party, recipient paid employees." F.2d, 1194-1195. consideration steps (the Board) consist officials. third step—review Union-selected arbitrator—is selection represents unrestricted choice list.21 27 Thus, purposes, justification offer V 28 created 100% exacted respondents, entry compelling maintain system future. contend moot. Rather, takes position completely avoids improperly, eliminates valid provides case. reject argument. 29 self-imposed remains flawed respects. reiterate characteristics impinges interests, appropriately justified prompt, decisionmaker both impingement burden.22 hold, required. Such serious defect depriving access escrowed unquestionably retain. If, example, certified accountant's verified breakdown expenditures, including categories challenge, reason portion nonmember's categories.23 On record us, believe anything approaching mathematical errors Nor decide proper independent audit, advance, coupled reduce size appropriate escrow. 31 problems flaws remain, therefore continues less than context. VI 32 hold today collection fee, challenge decisionmaker, amounts dispute pending. 33 matter instance correctly reversed Court's remanded proceedings. That reversal affirmed, proceedings consistent 34 ordered. 35 whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, concurring. 36 I observations. deems nongermane, nonideological panel's remarks obvious dicta. our cases, very questionable. 37 understand complaining complain; exhaust procedures, any, going arbitration. complies insist exhausted resorting courts. statute, became effective August 1981, provided: "Where organization, board organization measured uniformly payments shall deducted earnings non-member organization." Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. ¶ 10-22.40a (1983). superseded Educational Relations 48, 1701 seq. (Supp.1984). Estherlene Holmes, Edna Rose McCoy, Dr. Debra Ann Petitan. unknown reason, McCoy's 1505, 1509, Proportionate had, six plaintiffs. 1509. Respondents relied 42 U.S.C. § 1983 federal claims. alleged pendent claims, respondents pursued them. Similarly, mounted facial violative Due Process Equal Protection Clauses Amendment. attack. challenged, instance, more half ($2,167,000 $4,103,701.58) affiliated national organizations. claimed "The unusual plaintiffs, passing uses almost whole determining much deducted." 1187, 1191 assessment. Presumably arguments dispositive, neither nor concurrence mentioned process. viewed analysis deprivation liberty. Like moreover, statute. See, e.g., Robinson New Jersey, 741 598 (CA3 cert. denied, 469 1228, 84 366 (1985); Kempner Dearborn Local 2077, 126 Mich.App. 452, 337 N.W.2d 354 (1983), appeal dism'd, 926, 316, 254 (1984); White Cloud Assn. 101 309, 300 551 (1980), 875, 236, 176 Greenfield Assn., 385 Mass. 70, N.E.2d 180 (1982); Association Capitol Powerhouse Engineers Division Building Grounds, Wash.2d 177, 570 P.2d 1042 (1977). Earlier construed Act permit similar violating Constitution. (1963); Machinists Street, 367 740, 81 1784, 1141 (1961); Employees Hanson, 351 225, 76 714, 100 L.Ed. 1112 (1956). reflected important "principle representation," 220, 1791-1792, accorded great weight congressional "it promote peaceful relations obtain cost." 219, 1791. 455-456, 1896, (1984) ("[B]y allowing all, already countenanced significant . long settled interference industrial peace"). firmly grounded Amendment: appellants make, rather prohibited making, works heart notion free will, society one's beliefs shaped mind conscience coerced State. Elrod Burns, [427 U.S.], 356-357, 96 2681; Stanley Georgia, 394 557, 565, 1243, 1248, 542; Cantwell Connecticut, 310 296, 303-304, 60 900, 903, 1213. "These principles prohibit State belief God, Torcaso Watkins, 488, 1680, 982, supra; see 427 363-364, 17, 2684-2685 retaining employment. applicable bar, appellees cause job teacher." 234-235, 1799 (footnote omitted). association, expression, supported conclusion. 233, 1798. Roberts United States Jaycees, 468 609, 623, 3244, 3252, 82 462 (citing principle "[f]reedom plainly presupposes associate"). shop" arrangement, acts charge members, acting representative. R. Gorman, Text Law 642 (1976). supra, 3260 (Infringements "may regulations serve suppression achieved through means associational freedoms"); 347, 363, 2673, 2684, 49 547 (1976) (government association"); Kusper Pontikes, 414 51, 58-59, 94 303, 308, 38 260 (1973) ("[E]ven when pursuing interest, choose unnecessarily restrict liberty"); NAACP Button, 371 415, 438, 328, 340-341, 405 (1963) ("Precision regulation touchstone" context). "[P]rocedural often special bite context." G. Gunther, Cases Materials Constitutional 1373 (10th ed. 1980). Commentators obscenity, Monaghan, "Due Process," Harv.L.Rev. 518, 520-524 (1970); overbreadth, L. Tribe, American 734-736 (1978); vagueness, 1373, 1185-1195; forum permits, Blasi, Prior Restraints Demonstrations, 68 Mich.L.Rev. 1481, 1534-1572 (1970). purpose insure treads sensitivity areas freighted concerns. generally ("The amendment shown fragile destroyed insensitive procedures"). argue prism protections deprivations property. analyze problem perspective convinced context, Moreover, view concerning expenditures. Unlike Circuit, resolution nongermaneness lead appreciably different requirements, question. Rescue Army Municipal 331 549, 568-572, 67 1409, 1419-1421, 91 1666 (1947). Cf. (analyzing specific necessary, Amendment). clear "voluntary cessation allegedly illegal conduct moot case." Concentrated Phosphate Export Inc., 393 199, 203, 361, 364, 344 (1968). City Mesquite Aladdin's Castle, 455 283, 289, 102 1070, 1074, 71 152 W.T. Grant Co., 345 629, 632, 73 894, 897, 1303 (1953). concerns—the fear defendant return old ways," "a powerful weapon against law enforcement," ibid.—dictate legality practice defended "James Madison, Amendment's author, religious liberty: 'Who [t]hat authority force citizen pence one establishment, him conform establishment whatsoever?' Writings 186 (G. Hunt 1901). 'to man furnish disbelieves, sinful tyrannical.' I. Brant, Madison: Nationalist (1948)." 31, 1799, 13. "burden" simply obligation known. 774, 1802-1803 ("[D]issent presumed—it affirmatively known employee"); 119, 1162; 238, 1801. sector Labor-Management Reporting Disclosure 402(e), private duty suggests notice impose undue union. This suggest, course, 431(b); CFR 403.3 (1985), recognize practical "[a]bsolute precision" "expected required." 1163-1164, quoted 1801-1802 40. faulted calculating expenses during preceding year. exhaustive surely major expenses, verification auditor. With respect item payment $2,167,000 organizations, showing none charged, Our prior desirability remedy. 240, 41, 1802, 41; 1163-1164. suggestion availability ordinary remedies sufficient. misses point. Since rights," 455, responsibility facilitate here adequacy itself; presume remain ultimate protectors contexts, swift action. Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. Conrad, 420 546, 95 1239, 43 448 (1975); Blount Rizzi, 400 410, 423, 498 (1971); Freedman Maryland, 380 85 734, 649 (1965). Clearly, chooses extraordinarily challenges, agree, full-dress hearing, safeguards, minimum." Indeed, think expeditious arbitrator's represent choice. contrast here, frequently party's state-approved arbitrators. F. Elkouri & E. Elkouri, How Arbitration Works 135-137 (4th 1985); O. Fairweather, Practice Procedure 79-90 (2d 1981). preclusive effect McDonald West Branch, 284, 302 violation, task fashioning performed parties heard. proven violation commands community large. National Society Professional States, 435 679, 697-698, 98 1355, 1368, 55 637 Swann Charlotte-Mecklenburg 402 15-16, 1267, 1275-1276, 554 (1971). independently verified.

Classification Label: 6