Search EFFWA Site:

EFF's Election Report ·  
Gonzales Letter ·  
Welfare Reform ·  
Boeing Contract ·  
Budget & Taxes ·  
Business Climate ·  
K-12 Fact Sheet ·  
EFF Health Study ·  
Paycheck Protection ·  
Transportation ·  
Unemployment Ins. ·  

Receive Updates ·  
Bookmark EFF ·  
Contribute ·  
EFF in the News ·  
How Can I Help? ·  
Join EFF ·  
Media Center ·  

OPINION EDITORIAL

September 9, 2002

Contact: Marsha Richards, Communications Director
(360) 956-3482

Union presides over kangaroo court

By Ken Eikenberry
I went to the Federal Way headquarters of the Washington Education Association in May of this year to attend an impartial hearing on behalf of a teacher who was challenging her union. Frankly, having visited the old Soviet Union as a guest of the Procurator General, I believe their administrative hearings were more fair than the WEA process.

When I arrived at the union's headquarters, WEA officials informed me I would have to sign an agreement not to speak or write about anything I observed at the hearing . . . or leave immediately. I left. But I soon learned what the union is trying to hide.

The purpose of the WEA's so-called "impartial" arbitration hearing is to determine what portion of mandatory union fees paid by nonmembers is being used for representation purposes, as distinguished from the portion being used for political or ideological purposes. By "union," I mean the state, national, regional and local affiliates of the WEA. Together, these four groups collect more than $50 million each year from 74,000 public school employees in Washington state.

Individual teachers have about $733 taken from their paychecks for the union each year, and the WEA admits at least 24 percent of that (and 43 percent on the national level) is spent on activities not related to collective bargaining, contracts or grievances. This year, 281 teachers from around our state challenged the union's calculation, saying that percentage is much higher and a good part is spent on political causes they do not support.

The 281 teachers challenging the union are among some 3,900 statewide who have refused to join the union. These teachers are still required to pay mandatory fees equal to regular dues, but they cannot vote on their own contracts or run for union office, and the union withholds their legal liability insurance. Fortunately, a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision entitles these teachers to a refund of dues spent by the union on political and ideological activities.

At issue in this year's WEA arbitration hearing was just how much of the union's revenue goes into political action and other activity that, by court rulings, should not be charged to non-members. As a former state attorney general, I was astounded by the one-sidedness of the WEA's arbitration process.

The hearing was held during school hours on a weekday when most teachers, presumably, could not attend. A battery of attorneys was on hand for the union to counter any claims a teacher might make.

The arbitrator was hired by the WEA with no input from the other side.

The court reporter present was also hired by the WEA. This year the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a free-market organization that has long been involved in helping teachers hold their union accountable, attempted to bring its own court reporter because of difficulties getting access to the transcript at last year's hearing. EFF's court reporter was not allowed into the hearing, despite the arbitration's own rules saying all parties are permitted to have one.

Teachers challenging the WEA are not permitted to see any of the union's evidence before the hearing. As proof of their 24 percent calculation, WEA attorneys submitted twelve inches of documentation this year. Teachers had one hour to review and respond to this mass of material on the day of the hearing. Even trained accountants and lawyers who have seen the WEA's books say they cannot make sense of the documents in that time frame, much less ask probing questions designed to get at the truth.

The WEA's kangaroo court is an insult to the teachers it claims to represent. The union's activity is nothing short of a civil rights violation. We are talking about a very powerful organization, with 34 registered lobbyists in Olympia. WEA was the state's largest donor to legislative races in 2000 outside of the political parties.

Teachers tell me the union sends political candidate recommendations to its members on school e-mail systems and through the school mailboxes. They say the union controls what goes into those mailboxes, and teachers have in the past been prohibited from distributing information union officials don't like.

The day before I tried to attend the hearing, a delegation of staff members from the Evergreen Freedom Foundation and other professionals who volunteered their time, had sat in the WEA's hearing for several hours before they were told they must leave or take a vow of silence. They also left rather than submit to the gag order.

If any public agency conducted itself the way the WEA does, there would be an outcry heard across the nation. The prospect that public school teachers are forced to support political causes they don't agree with is perhaps the largest institutionalized civil rights violation that remains in our country.

It's time for school board members and legislators to look past the WEA's election clout and protect Washington's teachers from forced political speech. Tolerating this kind of union manipulation and abuse of the fair hearing process is unacceptable.

Ken Eikenberry, semi-retired, is a former state attorney general, state Republican party chairman, legislator, and FBI agent.


Evergreen Freedom Foundation
P.O. Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507
Phone: (360) 956-3482, Fax: (360) 352-1874
Email: effwa@effwa.org


Election Reform


Grassroots Washington

Performance Audit Pledge
View pledge results

Health Plan 4 Life

Ten-Minute Citizen

WashingtonVotes.org

ChoosingLiberty.org

1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance

At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:

"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"

- Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46)
(360) 786-7886

Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..."

Court of Appeals Ruling AG's WEA Appeal What is the WEA Hiding? Determining Government's Core Functions Priorities of Government Stewardship Series School Directors' Handbook Professional Choices For WA Educators Congressional Testimony (6/20/02) Agency Rule Change Request Social Security Calculator Tax Dividend Calculator Public Records Requests