Occasionally, nonmembers in NTEU-represented workplaces will say there is no need for them to join the union in order to get all the benefits of NTEU membership. Several years ago, in a case brought by NTEU, a federal appeals court made it clear that is not the case, and NTEU has emphasized and expanded upon that point over the years.

The impact of that 1986 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was to underscore the reality that union membership doesn’t cost –- it pays.

The court’s decision stressed that federal unions were required to treat workers the same only in matters involving enforcement of rights created by the collective bargaining agreement, such as grievances and arbitrations.

But in statutorily created proceedings in which the employee has a non-union option for representation, such as appeals to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), equal employment opportunity actions, or class action suits, there was and is no requirement that the union provide representation to nonmembers.

The appeals court case involved an employee who wanted NTEU to represent him before the MSPB in an appeal of his removal from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. NTEU declined because he was not a member, and the court supported that refusal.

The view that NTEU and union members are best positioned to speak for those in their workplace goes beyond just the statutory matters, like MSPB appeals, said NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley. One of the important rights accruing to dues-paying members, she said, flows from NTEU’s ability to appoint only union members to all bargaining unit positions on labor-management task forces, work groups and work teams.

That’s done for very good reason, the union leader said. “NTEU members not only are interested in being actively engaged in the workplace,” she said, “they also get training from NTEU on how to be effective advocates for employees’ best interests in meetings with management.”

In the years since the 1986 appeals court decision, the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) has ruled that a union does not have to represent a non-member in an oral reply in connection with such proposed disciplinary actions as suspension or removal. Nor must it represent a nonmember in oral replies to proposed reductions in grade or removals based on unacceptable performance. The FLRA is a three-member body that oversees federal sector labor relations.

Clearly, President Kelley said, union membership “is the best investment federal employees can make in a better workplace and a better work life, for themselves, their families, and their co-workers.”