WHEREAS, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear in its 2015-16 session a case, Friedrichs v. the California Teachers Association, that could potentially severely weaken teachers’ unions and other public-sector unions across the country; and

WHEREAS, 10 teachers in California and the Christian Educators Association sued the California Teachers Association to challenge the “fair share” requirement that members of a collective bargaining unit who do not sign up to join their union must still pay their fair share to cover the union’s costs for representing them; and

WHEREAS, the case challenges federal case law set nearly 40 years ago when in 1977 the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Abood v. the Detroit Board of Education that although public school teachers cannot be required to join a union or to contribute to the union’s political expenditures, they can be required to pay their fair share of the costs that the union incurs in negotiating and administering an agreement on behalf of all teachers; and

WHEREAS, although it is uncertain how the Supreme Court will rule in Friedrichs, the fact that the court decided earlier this year to hear the case is one measure of the threat that the court’s current conservative majority may overturn Abood; and

WHEREAS, a court decision in favor of the Friedrichs plaintiffs could effectively prevent school districts from collecting so-called “agency fees” from nonunion members represented by teachers unions and would likely extend to all other public-sector unions as well; and

WHEREAS, this means that although public-sector unions would still be obligated to represent all members of their bargaining units, they would no longer be assured of receiving fees to compensate them for the costs of representing nonmembers, which could deeply undercut the unions’ financial viability; and

WHEREAS, the Friedrichs lawsuit is backed by the Center for Individual Rights, a far-right legal organization known in part for its opposition to affirmative action and voting rights laws; and

WHEREAS, the Friedrichs case is driven by the same movement that has been working for at least two decades to undermine labor unions so as to reduce their influence on politics and public policy on behalf of teachers and other working people; therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the United Federation of Teachers will continue to educate our members about this case that could put an unjust financial burden on public-sector unions and cause great harm to the influence of the labor movement; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the UFT will develop a plan to engage and involve our members in the fight against the Friedrichs case; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the UFT will also continue our hard work in the political and legislative arenas to strengthen unions so that they may continue the fight for justice and fairness for our members and all working people; and

RESOLVED, that because the Supreme Court is not elected and are not subject to legislation that we advocate massive nationwide mobilizations of union power to stop the Friedrichs union-busting case.