Sara Gjerdrum, Executive Director Christina Clark, General Counsel

March 2015

1

» PELRA 1971 » Public sector collective bargaining » Employees vote to select exclusive representative » Opt-in union membership » 85% fair share fee allowance » Payroll deduction for dues and fair share fees

2

US Cool » First Amendment Permits

Public Sector “Agency Shop” » Permissible to Require

Employees to Share Costs of Collective Representation

» But Cannot Require Employees to Share in Political Contributions or Political Expression Unrelated to Collective Representation

3

1977 --NYC blackout --World Trade Center completed --Panama Canal returned to Panama --Apple II computers --President Carter grants pardon to Vietnam War “draft dodgers” --Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Amnesty International --Vikings lose to Oakland in Super Bowl (32-14) --The last execution by guillotine in France --Minnesotan Dorothy Benham is Miss America --Elvis Presley dies at age 42 --Star Wars, Roots, and Saturday Night Fever --Christina starts college

4

Knox (2012)

Harris (2014)

Friedrichs? (2016)

5

Knox (2012)

Is a new notice and opt-out required for mid-year dues

increase?

Court invites an Abood challenge: “Our prior decisions approach, if

they do not cross the limit of what the First Amendment can

tolerate.”

Harris (2014)

May a state require home aides to pay a representation fee to the union they

selected to represent them?

No – Abood doesn’t extend to such “quasi- public employees” – but then goes out of its way to call

Abood an “anomaly,” “questionable analysis,” “questionable

foundations,” “unsupported” 6

» Knox (SCt-2012), fueled Harris (SCt-2010) & spawned Friedrichs (SCt petition pending 2015) as well as other challenges: ˃ to opt-opt procedures (Lum) (CA) (2014); ˃ to agency fee and resignation and objection

process (Kennedy) (CA)(2014) ˃ to exclusive representation (Beckhart) (KY)

(2013)

7

» Harris (SCt-2014) Spawned More Challenges and Fueled Others

˃ To Exclusive Representation & Fees for Home Aides/Childcare Workers: Bierman (MN, 8th Cir. 2014), D’Agostino (MA 2014), Jarvis (NY 2014), Schlaud (MI, 6th Cir. 2010) (6th), Centeno (WA 2014), Greene (MN 2014))

˃ To Membership Drop Periods: (Pulaski, Arkansas & Michigan ULPs)

˃ To agency fee generally: Juber (CT 2014), Rauner (IL 2014), Hamidi (CA 2014), Mass Labor Charges (2014))

8

» Friedrichs (certiorari petition pending in SCt):

˃ In lower courts, challenged California’s opt-out system as unconstitutional

˃ Minnesota has opt-in, was considered to be “safe”)

˃ But Supreme Court petition now seeks to overturn Abood entirely

9

ME

NY

PA MD MD

VA NC

WV

SC GA

OH

TN AL

KY

MS

IN

MI

IL

WI

MO

FL

AR

LA

IA

MN

KS

NE

ND

WY

SD

MT

CO

NM

AZ

UT

OK

TX

ID

NV

WA

CA

OR

AK

Agency Fee

Right to Work/Shirk

10

ME

NY

PA MD MD

VA NC

WV

SC GA

OH

TN AL

KY

MS

IN

MI

IL

WI

MO

FL

AR

LA

IA

MN

KS

NE

ND

WY

SD

MT

CO

NM

AZ

UT

OK

TX

ID

NV

WA

CA

OR

AK

Bargaining

Bargaining Prohibited 11

So What Does This Mean? • Immediate loss of all fee-payers who have not

converted to membership • Loss of unengaged members who do not see value of

union membership

• Membership loss will be greater if loss of fair share combined with loss of payroll deduction and attacks on collective bargaining 12

No Agency Fee? Opportunities… It’s Up To Us

Opportunities

• Run issue based campaigns that engage members and fee payers

• Win on issue based campaigns demonstrating union difference

• Enhance and test worksite structures • Engage members and move them to activist to leader • Educate members around union difference • Build POWER • Move to true organizing culture

13

The Value of Belonging

¡Sí, Se Puede! 14