28 Day Trial   Products / Prices / Samples   About Us / Contact   FAQs   Home  
Newest employment law cases  
Summaries and links to full text

LawMemo - First in Employment Law

Emailed directly to you
and online all the time
Home MyLawMemo Custom Alerts Newest Cases Key Word Search Employment Law Memo
EEOC Info NLRB Info Supreme Court Arbitration Articles Law Firms Arbitration Blog Employment Law Blog

LawMemo Employment Law Blog 

Also read LawMemo Arbitration Blog 

 


« Supreme Court will decide whether FMLA's self-care leave provision abrogated states' 11th amendment immunity | Main | Remembering John Truesdale »

Supreme Court will decide whether union's assessment for political expenses must be preceded by Hudson notice
June 28, 2011 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo

In Knox v. Service Employees Int'l Union (US Supreme Ct cert granted 06/27/2011) the US Supreme Court will decide whether a union's assessment for political expenses must be preceded by a Hudson notice.

This case presents the question of whether a union is required - pursuant to Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, 475 US 292 (1986) - in addition to an annual fee notice to employees, to send a second notice when adopting a temporary mid-term fee increase. The mid-term fee increase in this case was designed to create a fund to be used for a "broad range of political expenses." The trial court held such a notice is required; the 9th Circuit (2-1) reversed.

The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the 9th Circuit judgment.

The 9th Circuit said that the use of the prior year method to assess nonmember dues was a practical necessity because the Hudson notice must be based on audited financial statements, and any money from the mid-term fee increase used for "non-chargeable" purposes would be refunded after the current year's audit.

The DISSENT argued that the annual Hudson notice was insufficient to enable nonmembers of the union to protect their First Amendment rights upon imposition of the temporary assessment. "The Union’s interest in this case is not a 'right' to nonmembers’ funds. The Union’s interest lies in receiving a fair contribution to its collective bargaining expenses. The Union has no legitimate interest, however, in collecting agency fees from nonmembers to fill its political war-chest."

LawMemo.Com

Get your 28 day trial now 

 
Google
 
Web www.LawMemo.com 
This form will search the LawMemo web site. 
It does not include Key Word Search.