Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association

Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association is a US labor law case before the United States Supreme Court. At issue in the case is whether Abood v. Detroit Board of Education should be overruled with public-sector "agency shop" arrangements invalidated under the First Amendment and whether it violates the First Amendment to require that public employees affirmatively object to subsidizing nonchargeable speech by public-sector unions, rather than requiring that employees affirmatively consent to subsidizing such speech. Specifically, the case concerns public sector collective bargaining by the California Teachers Association.

Background

In the 1977 case Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, the Supreme Court upheld the maintaining of a union shop in a public workplace. Public school teachers in Detroit had sought to overturn the requirement that they pay fees equivalent to union dues on the grounds that they opposed public sector collective bargaining and objected to the ideological activities of the union. The court affirmed that the union shop, which is legal in the private sector, is also legal in the public sector. They found that non-members may be assessed dues for "collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment purposes" while insisting that objectors to union membership or policy may not have their dues used for other ideological or political purposes.^[1]

Case

Conservative law firm Center for Individual Rights (CIR) brought the Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association case with funding from the Bradley Foundation.^[2] CIR President Terence J. Pell initiated contact with the plaintiffs, ten public schoolteachers who had paid agency fees.^[2] The lead plaintiff, Orange County elementary teacher Rebecca Friedrichs, previously served on her local union's executive committee.^[3]

References

External links

• Oyez summary of the case