| Communications Workers of America v. Beck | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 11, 1988 Decided June 29, 1988 | |
| Full case name | Communications Workers of America, et al. v. Beck, et al. |
| Citations | 487 U.S. 735 (more) 108 S. Ct. 2641; 101 L. Ed. 2d 634; 1988 U.S. LEXIS 3030; 56 U.S.L.W. 4857; 128 L.R.R.M. 2729 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 468 F. Supp. 93 (D. Md. 1979); 776 F.2d 1187 (4th Circ. 1985), on rehearing en banc, 800 F.2d 1280 (4th Cir. 1986); cert. granted, 482 U.S. 904 (1987). |
| Holding | |
| Under a union security agreement, unions are authorized by statute to collect from non-members only those fees and dues necessary to perform its duties as a collective bargaining representative. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Brennan, joined by Rehnquist, White, Marshall, Stevens; Blackmun, O'Connor, Scalia (Parts I and II) |
| Concur/dissent | Blackmun, joined by O'Connor, Scalia |
| Kennedy took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| National Labor Relations Act §8(a)(3) | |
Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that, in a union security agreement, unions are authorized by statute to collect from non-members only those fees and dues necessary to perform its duties as a collective bargaining representative.[1] The rights identified by the Court in Communications Workers of America v. Beck have since come to be known as "Beck rights", and defining what Beck rights are and how a union must fulfill its duties regarding them is an active area of modern United States labor law.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]
- ^ Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988).
This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
- ^ Ford, Karen E.; Notestine, Kerry E.; and Hill, Richard N. Fundamentals of Employment Law. 2d ed. Washington, D.C.: American Bar Association, 2000. ISBN 1-57073-806-8
- ^ Friesen, Jennifer (1988). "The Costs of Fee Speech--Restrictions on the Use of Union Dues to Fund New Organizing". Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. 15 (4): 603–648.
- ^ Holley, Jennings & Wolters 2008, p. [page needed].
- ^ Werntz, Heidi (1993). "Waiver of Beck Rights and Resignation Rights: Infusing the Union-Member Relationship With Individualized Commitment". Catholic University Law Review. 43 (1): 159–226.
- ^ Hutchinson, Harry (April 1, 2006). "A Clearing in the Forest: Infusing the Labor Union Dues Dispute With First Amendment Values". William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal. 14 (4): 1309. SSRN 898866.
- ^ Hutchison, Harry (June 1, 2000). "Reclaiming the Labor Movement Through Union Dues? A Postmodern Perspective in the Mirror of Public Choice Theory". University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform. 33 (4): 447–495.
- ^ Hartley, Roger (1989). "Constitutional Values and the Adjudication of Taft-Hartley Act Dues Objector Cases". Hastings Law Journal. 41 (1): 1–85.
- ^ Hutchison, Harry G. (Fall 2003). "Diversity, Tolerance, and Human Rights: The Future of Labor Unions and the Union Dues Dispute". Wayne Law Review. 49 (3): 705–772.
