The Mackinac Center for Public Policy Compulsory Union Dues in Michigan The NLRB has operated at a snail's pace enforcing Beck protections. President Bush provided the impetus for a renewed focus on the rights of nonmember employees by signing Executive Order 12800. Extending Worker Rights to Reduced Dues Since the Supreme Court's 1988 decision, Beck enforcement has been nearly nonexistent. Congress has taken no action to codify the protection of nonmember employee rights, despite two failed attempts. The NLRB has operated at a snail's pace enforcing Beck protections. If employees are left to seek redress with only private litigation, the realization of Beck rights will be slow, expensive, and nonexistent for most. President Bush's Executive Order In April 1992, President Bush provided the impetus for a renewed focus on the rights of nonmember employees by signing Executive Order 12800." The purpose of this Executive Order was to inform employees working for federal contractors that they have individual rights and discretion to control union political contributions generated from dues. The principal requirement of the president's order was the mandatory posting of signs at the work sites of federal contractors informing employees of their rights regarding payment of fees to the union. The full text of Executive Order 12800 read as follows:" Notice to Employees Under Federal Law, employees cannot be required to join a union or main- If you believe that you have been required to pay dues and fees used in part to The notice also advised employees to contact the Division of Information at the National Labor Relations Board for further information and gave the Board's address in Washington, D.C. President Bush indicated that his intention in signing the order was to "strengthen the political rights of American workers from being compelled against their will to pay union or agency dues in excess of what is actually used for collective bargaining purposes and contract administration." The primary purpose of this Executive Order was to enforce the protections of the Beck decision by “clarifying and bringing up to date requirements for labor organizations to account for how workers' dues are spent." 12 May 1997 Compulsory Union Dues in Michigan The Mackinac Center for Public Policy At one point, White House officials estimated that President Bush's Beck order could cut off as much as $2.4 billion annually in union money available for political activities. Union officials, however, disputed that figure as wildly inflated, contending that unions spend less than $1 billion yearly on political and other such activities." Although Bush's Executive Order was a step in the right direction of advancing worker knowledge, it was short-lived. Within a month of assuming office in 1993, President Clinton rescinded the Bush Executive Order as "distinctly anti-union" on the grounds that it failed to notify workers of any other rights protected by the NLRA." Even if this argument is accepted, a simple solution would have been to widen the scope of Executive Order 12800 to include other worker rights, but this was not done. President Clinton has not proposed an alternative to Executive Order 12800 and there seems little likelihood that he will do so. The present policy will tend to keep workers uninformed of their rights to a refund of compulsory union dues. National Labor Relations Board After seven years of notable absence from deciding Beck cases, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the enforcing federal agency for the NLRA, has recently started to carry out the Supreme Court's Beck decision in a series of cases outlined in the previous section. The Board has not gone as far as the federal courts in applying to private sector unions the same procedural requirements imposed on public employee unions because the Board does not view Beck rights as Constitutional in nature. Nevertheless, the NLRB provides essential safeguards that preserve employee interests because the Board's proceedings are fast, inexpensive, and the charging party is not required to hire an attorney. This offers many benefits to an individual employee who can ill afford the time and money to pursue a lawsuit against a union that disregards Beck rights. Unlike the courts, the NLRB can provide a labor forum that acts to balance the powerful resources available to the union against the individual employee. The Board typically employs only "make-whole" remedies that are designed to effectuate the policies of the NLRA. Reinstatement of a discharged worker and back pay are the most common examples of makewhole remedies used by the Board. It remains to be seen if the Board will adopt broader protections in enforcing Beck rights. A lack of voluntary union compliance to Beck standards will promote employee unfair labor practice charges. Some unions presumably will continue to litigate the boundaries of what constitutes germane collective bargaining activities, attempting to keep chargeable versus nonchargeable expenses as broad as possible. As this occurs, the Board will be compelled to further refine union obligations to nonmembers. Enforcement Options For Beck Objectors Beck rights established by the U.S. Supreme Court and the administrative agencies of government are not self-enforcing. In the absence of a union's voluntary compliance with Beck standards, it may be necessary for an employee to seek relief through the courts, the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC), or the NLRB. This is the least desirable way to White House officials estimated that President Bush's Beck order could cut off as much as $2.4 billion annually in union money available for political activities. President Clinton Lack of voluntary union compliance to Beck standards will promote employee unfair labor practice charges. May 1997 65-013-00-18 13 The Mackinac Center for Public Policy Compulsory Union Dues in Michigan The best way to secure worker Beck rights is by voluntary cooperation between the worker and his or her union. pursue employee rights but it may be the only way to secure them if unions do not comply voluntarily with the law. The best way to secure worker Beck rights is by voluntary cooperation between the worker and his or her union. Workers who wish to know how their dues money is being spent may request that information in writing from the union. (See Appendix A for a sample letter.) Workers who wish to receive a refund of dues money spent on union political, social, or ideological causes may inform their union in writing that they are exercising their rights as a Beck objector. (See Appendix B for a sample letter.) If a union fails to provide employees with the required Beck information, including the procedures for filing objections, or if an employee challenges the agency fee calculation, he or she may commence a lawsuit in federal court for breach of the union's duty of fair representation. In addition to a private lawsuit, the aggrieved employee may file an unfair labor practice with the NLRB, which has offices located in both Detroit and Grand Rapids, or, if the employee works in the public sector, charges may be filed with the Michigan Employment Relations Commission which has offices in Lansing and Detroit. Although procedures in these two agencies differ somewhat, they both require that the charge be filed within six months of the alleged unfair labor practice. The NLRB has an information officer on call throughout operating hours, and the Board has slowly improved the accuracy and availability of information regarding Beck rights. The NLRB also has free written materials that offer a general outline of all worker rights under the NLRA. MERC currently has no policy that standardizes information and no written materials to inform workers of their right to become nonmembers of a union. According to one MERC official, the information given in response to an information request regarding union withdrawal and dues rebate may vary based upon who a person speaks to at MERC. (Addresses and telephone numbers of these agencies are included in Appendix C.) Unions tend to downplay the likely Exercising Worker Beck Rights in Michigan impact of educating rank-and-file members Why Beck Rights Are Important To Workers of their right to a refund of union political expenditures. Unions tend to downplay both the likely impact of educating rank-and-file members of their right to a refund of union political expenditures, and the probable effects of enforcing Beck rights in the courts and administrative agencies. Union claims in this area may be a little suspect considering that they are a primary force in suppressing and distorting knowledge of Beck rights. If the exercise of Beck rights continues to receive greater legal attention and workers receive a growing body of truthful information on the subject, a number of contemporary trends will change the face of unionism. Widespread knowledge of Beck rights will cause union members to consider the advantages and disadvantages of exercising the right to a dues rebate and a reduced agency fee. The decision of whether to exercise Beck rights is very much a matter of individual choice. 14 May 1997 Compulsory Union Dues in Michigan The Mackinac Center for Public Policy Under the RLA and NLRA case law, a union can compel employees to resign from the union in order to exercise their Beck rights. The employees continue to remain fully covered by the terms of the collective bargaining agreement and the union is bound to represent the nonmembers through its duty of fair representation. For example, a union cannot refuse to handle grievances filed by a Beck objector simply because he or she is a nonmember, and courts are willing to more closely examine duty of fair representation cases where nonmember status is an issue. In exchange for services that the union must offer to the nonmember, the employee must continue to pay "financial core" dues to the union, thus sharing in the costs of representation but avoiding those expenditures which are not germane to collective bargaining. Given the substantial power the union has to affect an employee's working conditions, it may be to the employee's advantage to have a say in the way that the union exercises its authority. The only effective way to do that is to become or remain a union member and participate in its governance. Those rights of participation are almost always limited to union members. Depending on the employee's level of interest in union affairs, union members can participate in critical decisions about negotiation strategies and goals, how the collective bargaining agreement will be enforced and which grievances should be taken to arbitration. Participating in strike votes, ratification or rejection of contract terms, and the election of union officers are important rights of union membership that many Beck objectors must forgo. Exercising Beck rights in the workplace has other effects. Peer pressure and bullying from within union ranks often discourages members from exercising Beck rights. Exercising Beck rights by objecting to paying full union dues may create an uncomfortable working environment and tension among coworkers who support the union's political and ideological causes. Other members may feel that the Beck objector is shirking the full payment of dues while accepting the benefits of union representation, even though this is untrue because nonmembers must pay for exactly those services the union renders according to the duty of fair representation. More often than not, the primary reason that rank-and-file union members are discouraged from exercising Beck rights is simply because they are pressured to avoid "rocking the boat." Beck rights can be resolved only on an individual basis. Whether to become a core financial member is a personal choice-one which may stand primarily on principle. Beck rights stand for a very important principle, and the individual who exercises these rights usually does so on principle. In Beck the Supreme Court recognized that the principles of individualism and the ability to control one's own political, social and moral choices should not be undermined by policies favoring collective bargaining and unionization. Benefits received by nonmembers must be considered for a full appreciation of the rights recognized by Beck. Nonmembers escape the union's ability to fine workers for violating the union's constitution and bylaws. Escaping internal union rules and disciplinary actions may be a significant plus for some employees. Working during an authorized strike without penalty is a common example. A union member who crosses the picket line may face fines and other disciplinary proceedings, while a Beck objector is free to join strikers or work through a labor dispute based on his or her own choice and personal needs. The Supreme Court has held that an employee may resign from the union at any time in order to avoid the force of such disciplinary rules, but resignation only works prospectively and must precede the acts for which the union member may be disciplined." May 1997 The Supreme Court policies favoring 15 The Mackinac Center for Public Policy Chart 360 Compulsory Union Dues in Michigan Another major benefit to an employee who exercises Beck rights is that refunded dues money translates into an immediate pay raise. Although this may not increase each paycheck significantly, the total rebate can grow large over many years. Political and ideological expenditures out of these average union dues could presumably be as high as 79% (as in Beck) or even 90% (as in Lehnert). The union member who exercises Beck rights could save this money. For instance, an employee paying an annual union fee of $672 could, if the nonchargeable expenditures were as high as in Lehnert, receive a rebate of about $600. Likewise, an employee paying $250 annually could receive a rebate of $100 if the nonchargeable expenditures were determined to be 40%. There are many rebate variables which make precise figures difficult to estimate. (See chart 3.)50 The Employment Policy Foundation of Washington, D.C., estimates that the average local union member in 1995 in a non-right-to-work state pays approximately $425 in dues annually. Professor James Bennett of George Mason University calculated that the average annual dues for 1987 was $672.$1 On the other hand, the dues rebate may be smaller. The Michigan Education Association (MEA) claims that only 17.29% of its dues is allocated to nonchargeable expenditures. A full dues paying member pays $460.30 annually; the reduced fee paid by core members is $380.71 (less a $3.00 allowance for potential disputed chargeable costs). The MEA's accounting procedures are currently under legal attack, however, and the Association has so far refused to reveal the underlying documentation to prove that its accounting procedures are legitimate.52 16 May 1997 |