Knox v. CALIFORNIA STATE EMPLOYEES ASS'N

Jeffrey B. Demain, Altshuler Berzon LLP, San Francisco, CA, for the defendant-appellant.

W. James Young, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc., Springfield, VA, for the plaintiffs-appellees.

Before: J. CLIFFORD WALLACE, DAVID R. THOMPSON and SIDNEY R. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge THOMAS; Dissent by Judge WALLACE.

THOMAS, Circuit Judge:

This appeal presents the question of whether a union is required, pursuant to Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, 475 U.S. 292 , 106 S.Ct. 1066 , 89 L.Ed.2d 232 (1986), in addition to an annual fee notice to nonmembers, to send a second notice when adopting a temporary, mid-term fee increase. Under the circumstances presented by this case, we conclude that a second notice is not required, and we reverse the judgment of the district court.

Congress has long recognized the "important contribution of the union shop to the system of labor relations." Locke v. Karass, 555 U.S. 207 , 129 S.Ct. 798, 803 , 172 L.Ed.2d 552 (2009) (quoting Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Ed., 431 U.S. 209, 222 , 97 S.Ct. 1782 , 52 L.Ed.2d 261 (1977)). The Supreme Court has underscored this Congressional policy by enforcing the right of a union, as the…