Agency Fee Instructions

[Birdman]

For those who might be interested, January is the only month one can put themselves on Agency Fee status. Having been a dues objector since 1999, I feel this is the only tool available to to cut off funds used to support activities and organizations with which I strongly disagree. If you feel compelled to disparage my own personal decision know this, I couldn't care less.

Below, in appropriate red, are the simple instructions to avail yourselves of paying non-germane expenses with a link to the latest available (Dec. 09') full text on the twu.org website. Please read the full text in order to make an informed decision.

http://www.twu.org/downloadable/express/December_2009.pdf

This amended “AGENCY FEE POLICY” was originally adopted
by the TWU International Administrative Committee
on Nov. 1, 1991 and further endorsed on Sept. 1996, Nov. 30,
1996 and Nov. 1998.
1. Any TWU represented nonmember employee, whether publicly
or privately employed who is subject to a union security
clause conditioning continued employment on the payment of
dues or fees, has the right to become an objector to expenditures
not related to collective bargaining, contract administration,
grievance adjustment or other chargeable expenditures. A current
TWU member who chooses to become an objector, must
assume nonmember status prior to filing an objection through
these procedures. An objector’s fees shall be calculated in accordance
with this Policy.
2. To become an objector, a TWU represented nonmember
employee shall notify the International Secretary Treasurer in
writing of his individual objection by mail postmarked during
the month of January each year. A copy of this notice should
also be mailed to the Local Union. Such employees desiring to
object, but who were unable to make timely objection because
they were not subject to a TWU union security clause as of
January, must make an objection within thirty (30) days after
becoming subject to union security obligations and receiving
notice of these procedures. The objection shall be signed and
shall contain the objector’s current home address and TWU Local
Union number, if known. Objections will only be granted if
the document signed by a given individual who is a represented
non member employee makes clear that individual’s intent to
become an objector.

 

[Hackman]

For those who might be interested, January is the only month one can put themselves on Agency Fee status. Having been a dues objector since 1999, I feel this is the only tool available to to cut off funds used to support activities and organizations with which I strongly disagree. If you feel compelled to disparage my own personal decision know this, I couldn't care less.

Below, in appropriate red, are the simple instructions to avail yourselves of paying non-germane expenses with a link to the latest available (Dec. 09') full text on the twu.org website. Please read the full text in order to make an informed decision.

http://www.twu.org/downloadable/express/December_2009.pdf

This amended “AGENCY FEE POLICY” was originally adopted
by the TWU International Administrative Committee
on Nov. 1, 1991 and further endorsed on Sept. 1996, Nov. 30,
1996 and Nov. 1998.
1. Any TWU represented nonmember employee, whether publicly
or privately employed who is subject to a union security
clause conditioning continued employment on the payment of
dues or fees, has the right to become an objector to expenditures
not related to collective bargaining, contract administration,
grievance adjustment or other chargeable expenditures. A current
TWU member who chooses to become an objector, must
assume nonmember status prior to filing an objection through
these procedures. An objector’s fees shall be calculated in accordance
with this Policy.
2. To become an objector, a TWU represented nonmember
employee shall notify the International Secretary Treasurer in
writing of his individual objection by mail postmarked during
the month of January each year. A copy of this notice should
also be mailed to the Local Union. Such employees desiring to
object, but who were unable to make timely objection because
they were not subject to a TWU union security clause as of
January, must make an objection within thirty (30) days after
becoming subject to union security obligations and receiving
notice of these procedures. The objection shall be signed and
shall contain the objector’s current home address and TWU Local
Union number, if known. Objections will only be granted if
the document signed by a given individual who is a represented
non member employee makes clear that individual’s intent to
become an objector.

My thoughts exactly. Many including myself were on Twu handpay for years. I would wait for the certified letter from the worthless Twu before giving them any dues payment. Making them spend money to send letters and being late on dues was great fun, but a P.I.A. Among the nearly endless reasons to stop funding the Twu Company Union, the recent endorsement of another concessionary Twu sellout in 2010 and the recent increases in the unelected Twu International lavish salary after 9 years of major concessions has me seeing red.

Bankruptcy or not, it is well past time to stop funding the Twu International dues collection machine and the Gless Love Boat. With more concessions coming, we can't afford to pay the Twu sellouts to let the CompAAny screw us, they will do that for free. Agency Fee 2012.

 

[Boomer]

I understand you complete frustration: but, if you want to vote in the degree of the sh!te sandwich you will be forced to take you need to be in a position to cast that vote.

The TWU sucks is something that all of us can agree on.

Removing yourself from a position to vote on how much they suck is where we disagree.

Everyone that places themselves in the position of a dues objector, in the current climate, is a vote that cannot be counted.

Return to dues payor status now and join all of us that want to get what we can.

You can always return to dues objector later, we need your votes now.

 

[eolesen]

Agency fee is essentially taxation without representation -- I'm surprised nobody has sued over that yet...

Taxation without representation isn't by itself unconstitutional, but if you're forced to pay a fee to support collective bargaining, you should have a vote.

At least with hand-pay, you can keep the money in a savings account accruing nominal interest...

 

[700UW]

If you knew anything about it, it came out of Beck vs The CWA and it went to the Supreme Court.

They are consider non-members, cant vote on things nor attend meetings.

But by law they have the same rights under the grievance procedure as a member would.

So you save a few bucks a month and lose your rights.

And they pay what is germane to the CBA, no one rides for free.

 

[eolesen]

Oh, I've read Beck more than once. All it really does is rule that agency fees can be collected to support the collective bargaining process, and it has forced unions to be more transparent in how dues are being spent.

But my point that you seem to miss is that Beck (and subsequent cases) are pretty much silent over the issue of being forced to pay for a service that you ultimately can't even vote on. You're supposed to be able to provide input, but if you're not a member in good standing, that is a bit difficult, no?

 

[700UW]

It has been tested and a union has to be clear on its paperwork, every single penny spent or received is public record and unions are audited every year by the DOL and independent auditors who use to come in once a year and go over everything we had at out local lever. Unlike a company who doesnt have to break it down line my line and penny by penny compared to a union.

And the agency fee payor is still collecting and working under a CBA which costs to enforce, that is all they pay for. And by law they are still represented by the union in matter against the company or vice versa.

 

[Birdman]

You can always return to dues objector later, we need your votes now.

Due to the lack of legal challenge, you only get one month out of each and every year to file. Considering the last three years, I refuse to make willful contributions to the DNC DNC interests in exchange for a figurative vote on a bankrupt compAAny's last/best offer.

But my point that you seem to miss is that Beck (and subsequent cases) are pretty much silent over the issue of being forced to pay for a service that you ultimately can't even vote on. You're supposed to be able to provide input, but if you're not a member in good standing, that is a bit difficult, no?

The yearly requirement to file in other unions has been challenged and overturned, having been deemed undue hardship for the dues objectors. But the notion that you must even be required to pay non-germane expenses in order to be a member boggles the mind. I call that extortion.

 

[700UW]

It is illegal for a union to give dues money to a party or candidate.

Unions can set up PACs where members voluntary contribute their own money and that can be used for political purposes.

Dont let the facts get in your way.

 

[Buck]

It is illegal for a union to give dues money to a party or candidate.

Unions can set up PACs where members voluntary contribute their own money and that can be used for political purposes.

Dont let the facts get in your way.

With that being said, what constitutes a non-gemane expenditure?

 

[tech2101]

With that being said, what constitutes a non-gemane expenditure?

Ellis v. Railway Clerks, 466 U. S. 435, 447 (1984). Under agency shop arrangements, nonmembers must pay their fair share of union expenditures “necessarily or reasonably in- curred for the purpose of performing the duties of an exclu- sive representative of the employees in dealing with the employer on labor-management issues.” Id., at 448. To avoid constitutional questions that might arise were we to adopt a contrary interpretation of the RLA, however, we have held that costs unrelated to those representative duties may not be imposed on objecting employees.

AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, PETITIONER v. ROBERT A. MILLER ET AL.

 

[Frank Szabo]

One thing I've never really understood was the exception (if there actually is one) under the Railway Labor Act re: compulsory membership in a union.

Wouldn't the union's "security clause" fly in the face of the states' laws (those states like TX, KN and OK with RTW laws) in which it operates and, therefore, render the clause null and void?

I have no clue where to look for an answer.

 

[tech2101]

One thing I've never really understood was the exception (if there actually is one) under the Railway Labor Act re: compulsory membership in a union.

Wouldn't the union's "security clause" fly in the face of the states' laws (those states like TX, KN and OK with RTW laws) in which it operates and, therefore, render the clause null and void?

I have no clue where to look for an answer.

Your answer is here.

 

[Birdman]

It is illegal for a union to give dues money to a party or candidate.

Unions can set up PACs where members voluntary contribute their own money and that can be used for political purposes.

Dont let the facts get in your way.

For semantics sake only, I revised my post. Union political contributions are well documented and overwhelmingly slant left. If you claim the funds "members voluntary contribute" does not include compulsory dues, I would say your playing very loose with the facts, as noted in the "Beck Decision".

 

[TWU informer]

AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, PETITIONER v. ROBERT A. MILLER ET AL.

The day a group of TWU Members ban to together, hire an attorney, and file a challenge to the TWU calculations, just like the APLA members did in the above case, is the day the nasty truth will be exposed as to how corrupt the TWU really is.

Someday, this will happen.

Show me a petition with 150 TWU member names on it, that agree to execute the legal challenge, and I will personally lead the charge.
Until then, you are wasting your time with this subject.