History
  • No items yet
midpage
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
H-1139
| Tex. Att'y Gen. | Jul 2, 1978
|
Check Treatment
Case Information

*1 The Attorney General of Texas March 20, 1978 JOHN L. HILL

Attorney General Opinion No. H-1139

Commissioner Re: Whether one year irrevocable

Texas Department of Labor and Standards union dues checkoff provisions in union Sam Houston State Office contracts violate state law prohibiting compulsory unionism.

Building

Austin, Texas 107R

Dear Commissioner Tate:

You have requested our opinion concerning the legality of a one year irrevocable union dues checkoff agreement by which an employer, at the employee’s request, deducts union dues from an employee% paycheck and transfers such sums to the labor union. You ask whether such an agreement violates prohibitions concerning compulsory union membership. V.T.C.S. art. 5207a; see also V.T.C.S. art. 5154c, S 4; art. 5154g, S 1. Your precise question is:

Does an employee in Texas whose employment is governed by a union contract containing typical lan- guage for a one-year irrevocable dues checkoff agree- ment with the contracting employer, have a right to terminate that agreement because of the prohibition under Texas law against compulsory unionism Article 5207a, V.T.C.S., so as to be entitled to receive a payment of wages which would exclude the amounts that otherwise would have been withheld as union dues during the remaining term of the one-year agreement so as to support a wage complaint under the Texas Semi-Monthly Pay Day Law, or, would this type of one-year irrevocable dues checkoff agreement pre- clude the employee under such circumstances from claiming that additional amount as wages in connec- tion with a complaint filed with our office under the Texas Semi-Monthly Pay Day Law? In this regard, please consider the provision for dues checkoff con- tained in Article 5154e, V.T.C.S.

r . (H-1139)

Article 5207a provides in part:

Sec. 3. Any contract which requires or prescribes that employees or applicants for employment in order to work for an employer shall or shall not be or remain members of a labor union, shall be null and void and against public policy.

In discussing article 5207a and the related statements of public policy contained article 5154~ and 5154g, the Supreme Court of Texas has stated:

The intent seems obvious to protect employees in the exercise of the right of free choice of ]oining or not joining a union. The purpose of the statute is to afford equal opportunity to work to both classes of employees.

Lunsford v. Citv Brvan, 297 S.W.2d 115, ll7 (Tex. 1957). Thus the proscription of -. .---- ?ibligations and actions on the part of employers; they are See also Construction and General Labor required to afford “equal opportunity.” tST33K2d 958 (T 50) Sh Union Local No. 688 v. Stephenson, . t M tai Workers Local No. 175 v. Walker, 236 S.W.2d 683 (Tex. Ciz’App . d JIas?and li51, -pinions WW-1018 (1961); S-224 (1956). We do not wrtt re . believe that article 5207a therefore is dispositive of your question. ‘lhe controlling statute does appear to be article 5154e, V.T.C.S., to which you refer in the final sentence of your inquiry.

Article 5154e, V.T.C.S., provides in part:

Any contract which permits, requires, prescribes or provides for the retention of any part the compensation of an employee for the purpose of paying dues or assess- ments on his part to any labor union, without the written consent of the employee delivered to the employer authoriz- ing the retention or the withholding of such sum shall be null and void and against public policy.

The provisions of article 5154e are to our mind very clear. The key to determining whether or not contractual provisions for so called one year “irrevocable dues checkoff” are legal is to ascertain if the employee has given written consent to such a provision. Obviously, a provision which provides solely for a union dues checkoff agreement would be valid under article 5154e so long as the employee affected has given and delivered to the employer his written consent thereto. See - also 29 U.S.C. S 186 (c)(4). -

Your question arose from the possibility that an employee could file a complaint under articles 5155-5159, V.T.C.S., for unpaid wages which were deducted pursuant to a checkoff agreement. ln our opinion such a complaint under the semi- monthly payday laws would not be upheld if it were demonstrated that *3 (H-11391 employee had timely delivered a written consent to the employer authorizing retention or withholding such deduction.

SUMMARY A provision for a one year irrevocable union dues checkoff agreement between a union and a member thereof is made valid by the Legislature under article S154e, V.T.C.S., so long as the employee affected has given and delivered to the employer his written consent for such a provision.

Very truly yours, Attorney General Texas Opinion Committee

Case Details

Case Name: Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Court Name: Texas Attorney General Reports
Date Published: Jul 2, 1978
Docket Number: H-1139
Court Abbreviation: Tex. Att'y Gen.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.