Supreme Court to Consider 'Paycheck Deception' Case

One of the few cases the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear in its new term beginning next week involves the constitutionality of anti-union "paycheck deception" measures aimed at silencing working America's voice in politics.

The case is an appeal by anti-union forces against a decision by the Washington State Supreme Court in March that addressed the right of unions to use non-members' "agency fees" in political battles for workers' rights.

Workers who are covered by and benefit from union contracts but choose not to be members are still required to pay fees for the union's representation and bargaining under agency shop agreements in states without "right to work" laws. Courts have ruled that non-members have a right to a refund for the portion of their fees spent on political activity, and CWA and other unions have rebate policies covering such requests.

In 1992, Washington state passed a law requiring unions to get permission in advance from each non-member before using the funds for political work. The state supreme court declared the measure unconstitutional, saying it imposed an "extremely costly" and "significant" burden on a labor union's political activities, and violated First Amendment rights of free speech and association.

Anti-union groups disingenuously call such measures "paycheck protection." Unions, which have beaten back referenda and proposed laws in California and other states, have dubbed them "paycheck deception," as corporate America's interests are all that's protected when labor's political action efforts are weakened.

These "paycheck deception" proposals only single out unions. There is no mention of applying them to corporations or other membership organizations that engage in political and legislative activity, the AFL-CIO said. In the 2004 elections, spending by Big Business exceeded $1.22 billion — more than 23 times that of unions.

Both the state and the anti-union National "Right to Work" Legal Defense Foundation appealed the state supreme court ruling and the U.S. Supreme Court has consolidated the two appeals. The case was one of nine out of 2,000 submitted for review that the court has agreed to hear.