The Freedom Foundation has filed a complaint against the Washington Federation of State Employees/ AFSCME Council 28 with Washington’s Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) on behalf of client Todd Fix because of the union’s unlawful discrimination and interference with his right to refrain from union membership.
Like most public-sector unions, Council 28 operates under a so-called “union security agreement” that recognizes it as the exclusive representative of all the workers in a given bargaining unit. In return, the union agrees to represent everyone — including those who have opted out of the union or never joined in the first place.
In theory, unions accept this bargain in order to justify their demands to charge nonmembers “agency fees” that roughly approximate the amount of the dues they’re no longer paying. The catch is that the U.S. Supreme Court effectively banned agency fees with its 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME.
Consequently, unions frequently look for ways to deny equal service to “free riders.”
WFSE isn’t even subtle about its breach of what it owes all represented workers. WFSE president Mike Yestramski refused to respond to questions asked by Fix, a corrections officer for the Washington State Department of Corrections, about a $1,000 bonus and 3 percent raise he was supposed to get under Council 28’s new collective bargaining agreement with the state.
As the exclusive bargaining representative, only WFSE could raise the issue with the employer, but Yestramski couldn’t resist sending an email to Fix noting that he was reserving replies for union members.
Adding more fuel to the fire, Yestramski suggested that if Fix wanted any information regarding the union’s collective bargaining functions, he could always rejoin the union.
On Fix’s behalf, the Freedom Foundation responded by filing a PERC complaint to hold WFSE accountable for its unlawful conduct.
Washington law provides that the “…certified exclusive bargaining representative shall be responsible for representing the interests of all employees in the bargaining unit (emphasis added).”
The Washington Supreme Court itself found in Allen v. Seattle Police Officers’ Guild that unions have a duty of fair representation when operating as exclusive bargaining representatives. The right to fair representation requires the union to advocate for workers without consideration of their membership status.
Additionally, it’s unlawful for exclusive bargaining representatives to “restrain or coerce an employee” in the exercise of their right to not join a union. Conditioning access to equitable representation on a worker joining a union coerces the employee to join the union.
As for Fix, he was exclusively represented by WFSE for the purposes of collective bargaining. Therefore, WFSE owed him a duty of fair representation that was breached when Yestramski refused to communicate with him.
Public employees like Todd Fix who have no desire to affiliate with unions are constantly bearing the price of exclusive representation regimes, the original sin of modern public-sector labor law principles.
In exchange for their compliance with exclusive representation laws, workers have the right to be represented fairly by their exclusive representative. And they have a right to make their own choices about joining a union without fear of losing access to equitable representation.
Government unions far too often want to have their cake and eat it, too. They’ve succeeded in keeping workers confined in exclusive representation systems but tend to neglect the duties that must necessarily attach.
As the philosopher Voltaire once put it, “With great power comes great responsibility.”
Government unions cherish the power that stems from exclusive-representation regimes. But as the case of Todd Fix demonstrates, they have little interest in faithfully executing their responsibilities.
