Supreme Court Rules Inclusion Of "Standard" Security Clause Not A Fair Representation Violation

Co-written by Robert K. Stewart

In a significant decision affecting unionized employees, their employees and labor unions, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a union does not violate its duty of fair representation to employees by negotiating a "standard" union security clause into a collective bargaining agreement.

The Decision

In Marquez v. Screen Actors Guild,1 Marquez was hired for a small acting role by Lakeside Productions. Lakeside had signed a contract with the Screen Actors Guild ("SAG") making SAG the exclusive bargaining agent for performers that Lakeside hired for its productions. SAG had negotiated a union security clause into the labor agreement with Lakeside that required anyone working for Lakeside to be "a member of the Union in good standing" after 30 days from the date the employee first worked in the entertainment industry. The security clause also tracked the language of Section 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") concerning union security clauses.

Prior to being offered the role by Lakeside, Marquez worked in the entertainment industry for more than 30 days. After Marquez accepted the part from Lakeside, the Lakeside Casting Director was informed by SAG that Marquez was not a union member. Pursuant to the labor contract, the Casting Director told Marquez that she would have to pay $500 in fees to join SAG before she could actually be cast by Lakeside. Marquez did not pay SAG prior to the time Lakeside commenced filming, and as a result, she was not used in the role.

Marquez subsequently filed a lawsuit against SAG alleging that the union security clause violated the union's duty of fair representation on two grounds. First, she argued that because the security clause mandated "membership" in the union and payment of full dues it was unlawful because the contract should have specified that covered employees have the right to refuse to join the union, and instead pay a service fee only for the union's representational activities. In addition, the employee argued that the security clause was unlawful on the grounds that the language regarding the 30-day grace period for joining the union violated Section 8(a)(3) because it related back to her first unionized job in the entertainment industry.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the union did not violate its duty of fair representation, and that the issue of the 30-day language in the agreement was a question that the National Labor...