Judge blocks money to labor

Nonmembers fight special-election levy for CSEA campaign.

By Denny Walsh -- Bee Staff Writer
Published 2:15 am PST Thursday, November 3, 2005
Story appeared on Page A3 of The Bee

A Sacramento federal judge issued a temporary restraining order late Wednesday barring Controller Steve Westly from disbursing funds withheld from the pay of nonunion state employees to fight two of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's initiatives on Tuesday's ballot.

U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England Jr. found that the nonunion employees challenging the special assessment are likely to prevail on the merits of the issue.

A handful of nonunion state employees have brought the suit and are seeking to make it a class action.

The nonunion employees say they do not agree with the way the money is to be spent.

Absent a restraining order, the financial injury to these employees "would be irreparable, and the balance of hardships tips sharply in their favor," England ruled from the bench at the close of a hearing Wednesday.

The judge set a hearing for Friday on whether he should issue a preliminary injunction, which has a longer life than a temporary restraining order.

The California State Employees Association imposed a special assessment of 2.5 tenths of 1 percent of gross wages of state employees for the pay periods between Sept. 1 and Dec. 31.

According to an internal union document filed in court, the assessment is to raise money to fight ballot Propositions 75 and 76, which will be decided by voters in the special statewide election Tuesday.

The assessment is projected to generate $12 million for the union's media campaign against the two propositions, according to the document.

But England's order forbids Westly to disburse the funds from nonunion employees to CSEA.

Proposition 75 would require public employee labor unions to get written approval from their members before using dues for political purposes.

The union document says the measure "would effectively silence our political voices, while doing nothing to limit the influence of corporate special interests, who dump millions of dollars into the political and legislative process."

Proposition 76, sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Business Roundtable, would give governors broad new budget-cutting authority.

According to the union document, "Proposition 76 gives the governor exclusive power to declare a 'fiscal emergency.' With that power, he can break any contract we negotiate, lay off state workers and make drastic cuts to schools, health care and other public services."

About the writer:
Judge rejects bid to halt union levy for ballot fight

By Denny Walsh -- Bee Staff Writer
Published 2:15 am PST Saturday, November 5, 2005
Story appeared on Page A3 of The Bee

A Sacramento federal judge Friday rejected a request from about 4,000 state employees for an order barring special payroll deductions for a union fund to fight two of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's initiatives on Tuesday's ballot.

U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England Jr. had issued a temporary restraining order Wednesday prohibiting the deductions. But after a lengthy hearing Friday, England decided not to issue a preliminary injunction, which would have remained in force until the lawsuit is resolved on its merits.

The governing body of the Service Employees International Union, Local 1000, which represents about 86,000 state employees, voted in August to deduct one-quarter of 1 percent of gross wages for the pay periods between Sept. 1 and Dec. 31 to combat Propositions 75 and 76 on Tuesday's ballot.

The assessment is being levied on the local's members and an additional 28,000 nonunion employees who work in categories covered by the local's collective bargaining agreements and who pay "fair share" dues to the union. About 4,000 of the latter group objected to the assessment because they do not oppose the two targeted initiatives.

The union projects the assessment will generate approximately $12 million for television and radio advertising, direct mail, voter registration and get-out-the-vote activities aimed at defeating the two propositions.

The legal challenge was filed Tuesday by the Virginia-based National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation on behalf of eight nonunion employees and one member of the union. Their attorney, W. James Young, hopes to eventually persuade England to certify the suit as a class action on behalf of the approximately 114,000 state employees who pay dues to Local 1000.

Union attorney Jeffrey Demain agreed in court Friday that his client will refund money already withheld from the paychecks of the eight nonunion employees and will stop taking the special assessment out of their checks.

Other than those eight, the union is free to levy the assessment on union members and nonmembers alike.

Proposition 75 would require public employee labor unions to get written approval from their members before using dues for political purposes.

Proposition 76, sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Business Roundtable, would give governors broad new budget-cutting authority.

Young argued that the union's effort to defeat these measures is "purely political," that the money raised is being used for political speech, and imposing the special assessment on people who favor the propositions is a violation of their free speech rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Demain conceded that Young might be right with respect to Proposition 75. But, Demain argued, the other measure is an attack on the working conditions of the union's membership.

England said that, absent an audit, it is impossible for him to parse the uses of the assessment fund, making a preliminary injunction impractical.

About the writer: