LABOR LAW
Supreme Court of Alaska (2023)
Sammy Sawyer
In State v. Alaska State Employees Ass’n/American Federation of State, County, 529 P.3d 547 (Alaska 2023), the supreme court held that neither the First Amendment nor the holding in Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31 (138 S. Ct. 2448 (2018)) required employers to obtain union members’ affirmative consent for union dues deductions as mandated in a collective bargaining agreement. (Alaska State Employees, 529 P.3d at 550). Alaska State Employees Association (ASEA) is a union representing thousands of State employees, including both union members and nonmembers. (Id.). AESA entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the State that required the deduction of union members’ dues from their paychecks, and it also deduced from nonmembers’ paychecks a mandatory “agency fee.” (Id.). In June 2018, the United States Supreme Court held in Janus that charging agency fees to nonmember employees violated their First Amendment rights. (Id.). In response to this holding, the State and ASEA modified their agreement to halt the collection of agency fees from nonmembers. (Id.). In 2019, the State took the position that Janus also required the State to protect union member employees’ First Amendment rights by obtaining clear and affirmative consent before deducting union dues. (Id.). When some members expressed a desire to leave the union, the State ceased collecting their dues. (Id.). On appeal, the State argued that Janus placed prohibitions on public employers generally that apply to both union members and nonmembers. (Id. at 555). Alternatively, the State argued that broader First Amendment principles justified its actions. (Id. at 556). The supreme court affirmed the lower court’s decision entering judgment for AESA, reasoning that Janus expressly dealt only with the issue of charging agency fees to nonmember employees. (Id. at 555). Additionally, the court rejected the State’s First Amendment argument due to the lack of “state action.” (Id. at 557). It specified that facilitating interaction between two private parties, being the union and the union members, does not qualify as a “state action” as is required in a First Amendment violation. (Id.). Affirming the lower court’s decision, the supreme court held that neither the First Amendment nor the holding in Janus required employers to obtain union members’ affirmative consent for union dues deductions as mandated in a collective bargaining agreement. (Id. at 560).
