Class action aimed at recovering illegally spent dues
OLYMPIA — Today a group of Washington teachers filed a class action lawsuit in Thurston County Superior Court against the Washington Education Association (WEA) to recover fees owed to them by the union.
WEA officials admitted last September they had violated state law by spending agency fees on politics without getting permission from individual teachers. The union may be required to return funds to as many as 8,000 agency fee paying teachers.*
The WEA’s admission of guilt led Attorney General Christine Gregoire to file her own suit against the WEA last October. According to a press release issued by the AG’s office, her lawsuit is "aimed at enforcing the law on behalf of the citizens of Washington and is not intended to recover fees paid by individuals to the WEA."
It was the second time Gregoire took the union to court for campaign finance violations.
The Evergreen Freedom Foundation and National Right to Work decided to assist teachers seeking to recover their wages and get a court injunction prohibiting union officials from any future misuse of their hard-earned money.
"State law prohibits WEA’s misuse of these wages for political contributions,"said Steve O’Ban, attorney for the teachers. "The only way to fully right this wrong is to get their money back."
Based on an average refund of $173 in 1999, WEA collected more than $725,000 for activities not related to collective bargaining (including political activities).
* Agency fee payers are teachers who have decided, often for political and ideological reasons, to give up their union membership. State law prohibits the union from spending any of their fees for political purposes without annual written permission from each teacher.
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]?"