UTLA Dues Rule Upheld by Court : Labor: U.S. justices let stand decision that non-member teachers must pay full amount unless they notify the union in advance that they object to paying for political, non-bargaining matters.

In a victory for the teachers union in Los Angeles, the Supreme Court on Monday let stand a ruling allowing the union to collect full dues from non-members unless they object in advance in writing.

The justices rejected an appeal filed on behalf of 18 dissident teachers by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which contends that public employees cannot be forced to subsidize the political activities of a union.

Under the high court’s action, all 34,000 teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District will have the full $440 annual dues subtracted from their paychecks unless they notify United Teachers-Los Angeles in advance that they object to paying for “political, ideological and non-bargaining matters.”

Ira Gottlieb, a lawyer for the union, said he expected the union’s position to be upheld by the courts. “We thought all along the law was clear that the burden rests with the non-member to make his objection known,” Gottlieb said.

In recent years, about 15% of the union’s annual dues pay for “political and ideological” expenses, such as campaign contributions, union officials said. All the rest cover expenses associated with collective bargaining and related activities said to benefit all teachers.

Since January, 1990, the Los Angeles school district has operated under an “agency shop” arrangement by which all teachers are required to pay dues to UTLA as the certified bargaining agent for the teachers. The union has 28,000 members.

In a series of rulings dating to 1977, the Supreme Court has sought to reconcile two potentially conflicting principles. Under federal labor law, all workers can be forced to pay their fair share of a union’s operating costs. But the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech means that the government cannot force individuals to pay for political statements that they oppose.

As a result, the court has said that public sector unions can collect basic operating fees from all workers, but union dissidents can avoid paying their share of the costs relating to political activities.

In February, 1990, UTLA officials sent a letter to non-members saying that they would be charged full union dues unless they objected. “If you do not desire to pay a fair share equal to the full UTLA dues, you must send a letter . . . to the UTLA office within 30 days of the mailing date of this notice,” the letter said.

According to the Right to Work Committee, as many as 5,000 non-members ignored the notice and were surprised to find that the full UTLA dues were being withheld from their checks.

“Some of these people are violently opposed to the union,” said W. James Young, a lawyer for the Right to Work Committee in Springfield, Va. “When they get something in the mail from the union, they often throw it away without reading it.”

Robin Gansley Mitchell and 17 other Los Angeles teachers joined in a lawsuit challenging the union’s procedure. They maintained that the union cannot collect money to subsidize political activities from non-members unless the teachers “affirmatively” permit such deductions.

Initially, they won a ruling in the case from U.S. District Judge Robert Bonner in Los Angeles. But a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Bonner’s decision in April.

The Right to Work Committee lawyers appealed the case (Mitchell vs. UTLA, 92-169) to the Supreme Court, arguing that the prevailing rulings could force millions of “silent non-members to fund the union’s political” causes against their will. But without comment or dissent, the justices dismissed the appeal.