Rebecca
Friedrichs doesn’t want to pay her union dues. And indeed, because our culture
is premised on individualism some workers can now legally opt out of their
dues.
Friedrichs, whose workplace is
represented by California Teachers Association, wants something more. She wants
no payroll deduction for what is called agency
fee or fair share service fee.
This is an amount between $350 to $400 a year given to a union for negotiating
her contract and handling any grievance she may have. Friedrichs doesn’t want
the union speaking for her in the public sphere at all and she thinks an agency
fee is a violation of free speech.
Friedrichs does not have a moral
objection to any union position in the sense that a particular topic touches on
her religious liberty—a matter like abortion or, let’s say, marriage policies
or even evolution. Her objection covers anything the union says about classroom
size, teacher evaluation, the merits of charter schools and the like. The
union, by the way, is not allowed to leave Friedrichs off its lists, allowing
her to handle any situation on her own.
Here are remedies Friedrichs might take:
·
She could apply for a job at a school
without a union. Some Catholic schools, for example, do not have a union,
though some do. Friedrichs, however, prefers her current workplace, presumably
in part because its union wages are higher than in nearly all private schools.
·
Friedrichs and her like-minded friends
could go to union meetings and lobby for positions or officers they favor. That
is, they could reform the union from within. But that approach is out of sync
with our penchant for individualism.
So Friedrichs, like many people who
disagree with one thing or another, got a lawyer. She is now on the way to the
Supreme Court, as early as October 2015 or sometime in 2016.
Friedrichs and her co-plaintiffs may or
may not be religious. The natural law, however, applies to all of them. The
natural law upholds rights. It is not though beholden to individualism. It
blends responsibility with rights. On this workplace topic natural law says:
·
People are interdependent by nature; we
are not ragged individuals.
·
A society with many buffer groups is
healthier than a total State.
·
Unions are a primary buffer group. Not every workplace needs to have a union, but society at large
must have many bargaining unions within it.
·
A workplace with a union is by its
nature a closed shop. That is, an
employer in such a workplace cannot, among those eligible for bargaining, hire
some union members and some workers who are not. Collective bargaining quickly
becomes dysfunctional if some are in and some are out.
·
Simple quid pro quo justice or fairness
requires all eligible workers in a union shop to join and participate in their
local. They thus can enjoy the benefits of one another’s sacrifices and
contributions.
U.S. law has a basis in the natural law.
But specific court cases weigh multiple values. Friedrichs may win her case,
maybe not. Without endorsing any one union or any one position of any union,
her behavior and that of her co-plaintiffs in this matter is a blow to the
already fragmented social network in our society. On other civic matters
(participation in voluntary organizations or active membership in a church or in
a precinct or even care for extended family members) Friedrichs and the others
might be exemplary. This column treats a limited topic; it has no need to know
about her other involvements.
Droel edits INITIATIVES (PO Box
291102, Chicago, IL 60629), a free printed newsletter about faith and work.