RECENT COURT RULINGS
WORKERS WIN LAWSUIT AGAINST
COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA
Oct 1, 1998 (as reported in the Oct 2, l998 New York Times and Wall Street Journal)
The U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. ruled that the Communications Workers of America (CWA) did not properly notify approximately 50,000 of its workers that they were not required to pay full union dues. The notices posted in the union magazine were deemed inadequate because agency fee payers are not entitled to receive the publication. Any of those workers who objected to paying for union activities outside of collective bargaining are now entitled to refunds with interest.
UNION SECURITY CLAUSES ARE NOT REQUIRED
TO INCLUDE WORDING ON WORKERS’ RIGHT NOT TO JOIN
(As reported in the Seattle Times, Nov 3, l998 and the Wall Street Journal, Nov 4, l998)
The Supreme Court ruled that union contracts do not need to spell out that workers have a right not to become full union members.
The court ruled unanimously against actress Naomi Marquez-Blake who had filed suit against the Screen Actors’ Guild for obligating her to pay $500 in union dues which she was unable to and not legally required to pay to obtain a one-day acting job for a television series. Sandra O’Connor said that Naomi’s argument that the details should have been in the contract "would require unions to spell out all the intricacies of every term used in the contract". She also wrote, however, that unions are still obligated to somehow inform workers that dues are required only in the amount that covers the costs of contract negotiations. She emphasized that the ruling applied only to the contract’s wording.