Financial core
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Please see the discussion on the talk page. |
A 1963 United States Supreme Court ruling, NLRB v. General Motors, defined the term financial core as it applies to compulsory union membership.
Contents |
[edit] Origin
Under the National Labor Relations Act (Sec. 8 (a) (3)) an employer and a labor organization may agree to condition employment upon membership in the union. The 1963 ruling limited the burdens of membership upon which employment may be conditioned to the payment of initiation fees and monthly dues. In the words of the court, "Membership as a condition of employment is whittled down to its financial core." Or, in other words, "If an employee in a union shop unit refuses to respect any union-imposed obligations other than the duty to pay dues and fees, and membership in the union is therefore denied or terminated, the condition of membership for 8 (a) (3) purposes is nevertheless satisfied and the employee may not be discharged for nonmembership even though he is not a formal member."
In 1988, the Supreme Court again addressed the financial core issue in Communication Workers of America v. Beck. The question this time was whether an employee who is not a formal member in the sense above, but rather a financial core member, can be required to pay full union dues and fees, if those fees are used for purposes beyond collective bargaining, contract administration, or grievance adjustment (so-called collective bargaining activities). The court ruled in a 5 to 3 decision, with Justice William Brennan writing for the majority, that the financial core obligation does not include "the obligation to support union activities beyond those germane to collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment."
[edit] Impact
Most significantly, this financial core definition of the minimum union dues required to get and/or keep employment under a compulsory union contract allows objecting union members to withhold that portion of their compulsory union dues that the union spends on any political activities, campaigns or causes. By resigning full constitutional membership in their labor union and declaring themselves financial core workers citing the Beck ruling, financial core members are termed dues-paying-non-members. They keep their union jobs and all union benefits. However, since they are no longer constitutional members of the labor union, they are free from any union internal rules and regulations governing full constitutional members. They can not hold union elected office nor can they even vote on the union contract they support financially.
The primary impact of the financial core issue has been in the acting industry. By joining the Screen Actors Guild or American Federation of Television and Radio Artists as a financial core member, an actor can pursue work in states such as California, where union membership is a prerequisite to work in the industry. Full members of these unions are prohibited from working non-union jobs, but financial core members are not restricted by the rules of the unions and so may work either union or non-union jobs. When working a union job, they would receive the same benefits as full constitutional members.
Proponents of the decision to declare financial core status note that it gives actors a wider range of choices since they can elect to take work that is not available to full members.
Opponents of the decision to declare financial core status note that it weakens the union which won the benefits members, both financial core and full, enjoy. Some claim that financial core members are essentially free loading the system.
[edit] References
- National Labor Relations Act
- Labor Board v. General Motors (1963)
- Communication Workers of America v. Beck (1988)
