The argument against these agency or “fair share” fees is that when a union bargains with a school district or other public entity they are invariably arguing for a variety of public policy positions.  Policies the union may weigh in on include teacher tenure, recognized holidays, class sizes, salaries, student discipline policies, and myriad other items that at times become part of contracts.  Even though many employees may support the union stance on some of these issues, employees who disagree with any union position should not be compelled to pay a fee to support the union position.  This is a freedom of speech issue—no person should be forced to pay for political advocacy they disagree with. 

Even the teachers unions are preparing for defeat. Mike Antonucci reports that the NEA is training their bargaining locals on how to cushion themselves against declines in dues revenue that are certain to follow a Supreme Court ruling striking down agency fees.  The NEA is encouraging their locals to try to trap their members into payroll deduction agreements that are difficult to get out of, even if the teacher is not a union member. Consider these goals from the NEA’s “8 Essentials to a Strong Union Contract Without Fair-Share Fees.”

• Demand exclusive access to new-hire orientations.
• Require the district to force teachers to pay for a full year of union dues even if they resign membership.
• Require the district to honor payroll deduction agreements that may offer only narrow exclusion windows. (For example, this one in Minnesota only allows you to opt out of payroll deduction between 9/24 and 9/30, and auto-renews yearly even if you are a not a union member.)
• Require the district to provide your home contact information.

Such bargaining provisions have helped the NEA to maintain some membership in states that do not allow agency fees. But the membership is typically much lower than in states with agency fees. 

It would be a real boon to school employees’ free speech and free exercise of religion if the NEA would stop trying to trap all school employees in their union, and instead began advocating for the voice of all teachers to speak and act as their conscience dictates—even if that means they choose to not join the union. A more open stance on this hot-button issue could even lead to higher voluntary membership in the union.