Locke v. Karass

Background

The case involved Maine government employees who do not belong to their local union but must pay a service fee under the collective-bargaining agreement. That fee covers the local’s representational work and part of the affiliation fee the local pays to its national union. A small portion of that affiliation fee paid for national litigation that largely benefits other locals. Nonmember employees sued, arguing the First Amendment forbids charging them for national litigation; lower courts and an arbitrator upheld the fee. The Court took the case because lower courts disagreed on the issue.

Reasoning

The Court asked whether the First Amendment allows charging nonmembers for national litigation costs. It applied the Court’s prior test: charges are allowed if (1) the litigation’s subject matter appropriately relates to collective bargaining and (2) the charge is reciprocal — other locals reasonably are expected to contribute to the pool of resources. The Court found no meaningful difference between national litigation and other national activities the Court has allowed to be charged, and the parties assumed reciprocity was present. Applying that standard, the Court concluded the disputed national litigation costs were chargeable and affirmed the lower court.

Real world impact

As a practical matter, public employees who do not join a union can be required to pay small, pro rata shares of national litigation costs when those lawsuits concern chargeable bargaining matters and cost-sharing is reciprocal. The decision leaves open how courts should prove or define true reciprocity.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Alito, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Scalia, concurred but emphasized the Court did not define “reciprocity” or decide who must prove a bona fide pooling arrangement; the Government had urged that the national bear that burden.