Teachers Saving Children^® Inc. - National

Exhibits: During the 21/2 days prior to the RA business sessions, delegates had the opportunity to visit over 100 exhibit booths. This year Teachers Saving Children^® applied and was accepted as an exhibitor. Thousands of individuals passed our booth that focused on the respect for life through the loving choice of adoption. Hundreds of individuals stopped and perused our materials; many stopped to discuss with us a variety of life issues.

RA New Business Items: Delegates submitted two New Business Items (#5 and #20) that requested the NEA-EPAC Board to reinstate on the written questionnaire candidate questions about strongly held NEA positions.

Delegates learned that a NEA-EPAC Board committee had reviewed and revised the written questionnaire. During the revision process non-educational questions, including the "reproductive freedom" question, were eliminated from the written questionnaire; although these questions could be asked during the screening process as the philosophy of the NEA regarding these issues had not changed.

Both New Business Items #5 and #20 were defeated by the assembly. Pro-life delegates and members see the defeat of these two New Business Items as a small victory in the battle for life.

Bylaw Amendments: Two Bylaw amendments were submitted at the end of the 1996 RA to be considered by secret ballot at the 1997 RA.

Bylaw amendment 8, as editorially amended on the floor, would have created a new section in Bylaw 11 (General Finance): "The Secretary-Treasurer shall ensure to the NEA membership that no General Fund monies are funneled expended for abortion." Christine Nowak of New York spoke strongly in its favor. During the debate there was an object to consideration called. President Chase put this to a vote of the body. He determined that there was not a 2/3-voice vote necessary to stop debate. However, division was called and President Chase then determined there was a 2/3 standing vote. This vote stopped discussion on the Bylaw. Bylaw amendment 8 was voted upon by secret ballot. The voting results were:

		Yes	2,408 (30.29%)
		No	5,543 (69.71%)

Since the contact person for Bylaw amendment 9 was not a delegate this year, David Kaiser of Ohio became the chief debater for the Bylaw amendment that would have created a new section in General Finance. He moved to amend the proposal to make it easier for NEA to facilitate. However, the assembly surprisingly voted down this amendment. Therefore Bylaw amendment 9 was voted upon by secret ballot as originally submitted: "The Secretary-Treasurer shall publish a quarterly report for chairpersons of all registered NEA Special Interest Caucuses of expenditures associated with activities of interest to the different caucuses." The results of the secret ballot vote on Bylaw amendment 9 were:

		Yes	2,597 (32.66%)
		No	5,354 (67.34%)

Resolutions: Prior to the motion to adopt the Resolutions report, delegates may request to set-aside a specific resolution for separate consideration. The remaining resolutions are then presented for a vote as a single block of resolutions.

Due to the anticipation of lengthy and important discussion surrounding the peer review resolutions, President Chase without objection allowed for immediate discussion on two resolutions in Section D. Following the discussion of these two resolutions, the normal procedure for the discussion of set-aside resolutions began.

Since the NEA Resolutions document is very large, it is impossible to discuss all set-aside resolutions. This year the assembly began discussion with Section J, then A, and B. Due to time constraints, the assembly voted to end discussion of set-aside resolutions with Section B and to approve the entire Resolutions document as recommended by the committee and amended by the delegates.

The "reproductive freedom" issues are in Section I. Those resolutions in Section I that were set-aside were not discussed this year, but were adopted as recommended by the committee. Since no changes were recommended for these resolutions, the NEA delegates once again reaffirmed their "reproductive freedom" (pro-abortion) position.

Final Thoughts: Times are changing, and delegates are beginning to become more educated regarding life issues. Pro-life delegates continue to seek the wisdom of God regarding the strategies chosen in making the truth known.

Consider getting involved as a delegate in 1998. The process is simple and if the Lord wants you there, you'll win the delegate election. The next convention will be July 1-6 in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Today many unions have become aggressive agents of the "culture of death". They use their members' dues to finance legislative activity on behalf of abortion rights and to conduct public relations campaigns against groups that support "traditional values". Education employees have the right to withhold their dues from such unions.

There are two sources of protection for people contributing dues or belonging to a union which engages in activities contrary to their personal beliefs: 1) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects against discrimination on the basis of religion. It requires employers and unions to accommodate the sincerely held religious beliefs of their employees and members; 2) Protection, not related to religion, but based on personal ideology, regardless of what religion a person happens to adhere, arises under three different areas - a) The National Labor Relations Act; b) The Railway Labor Act; and c) The First Amendment of the Constitution.

The protection for political objections is important because the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that companies and unions are allowed to enter into agency shop contracts that require all employees to either be a member of the union or not be permitted to work at the company. The court also declared that if a particular union required compulsory membership, then there are important constitution rights under the First Amendment.

The First Amendment not only deals with the right of speech, but also the right of association. The right of freedom of speech or association includes the right to speak and associate as well as the right not to associate or speak. So the court upheld the requirement that employees join unions in certain industries, but also put very clear limits in place.

The court made an important distinction between unions using money for political or lobbying reasons versus using dues for purposes pertaining to the collective bargaining agreement and the rights of particular members. The court further stated that unions could only collect a portion of those dues that are used for collective bargaining if a member objects to the union's broader agenda. Therefore, if an educator belongs to a union that lobbies in favor of abortion, the union has no right to require its objecting members to support the lobbying with their dues.

The Supreme Court's Hudson case involved the Chicago Teachers' Union. The court explained that unions who charge their employees fees which include expenditures for non-collective bargaining activities, must give the employee: 1) an adequate explanation of the basis for the fees, 2) a reasonably prompt opportunity to challenge the amount of the fee before an impartial decision-maker, and 3) an escrow of the amounts reasonably in dispute while any challenge is pending. The union must justify every dollar of fees that is disputed.

The court's ruling prompted unions, including the NEA, to carefully audit their finances to delineate chargeable and non-chargeable expenditures; that is to show how they are spending dues money. In the December 1996 NEA audit, for example, the chargeable expenditures in the category of government relations - which deal with promoting the NEA's federal legislation agenda, lobbying, political activities, get-out-the-vote campaigns, preparing and coordinating congressional testimony - is $0.00. The amount in non-chargeable expenses is $11,189,976.

In the total 1995-96 NEA budget of $186,179,358 annual audited expenditures, 68.58% was chargeable and 31.42% was not. The NEA is using almost $60 million for purposes unrelated to collective bargaining and that money is coming from union members' dues. Therefore, an educator who objects to the NEA's political and social agenda is entitled to withhold about one-third of his/her NEA union dues.

An educator can not simply stop paying dues, but he/she must adhere to a well-established process for raising his/her objection with the union. If members who objected to these expenditures would stand up and say "no", that money would not be available for the NEA to spend and this type of practice would grind to a halt. If the NEA doesn't have that money, they would not be allowed to spend any of the remainder of their money for those non-collective bargaining activities. The Supreme Court said that unions could not just shift accounts.

Included in the NEA's nonchargeable activities, with money from people who do not object, are lobbying and political efforts such as voter registration, supporting or contributing to political organizations or candidates, and supporting ideological causes including reproduction freedom (abortion and birth control).

Title VII provides protection to persons who object, not only to paying dues going to improper causes, but who do not want any of their money going to an organization that conflicts with their religious beliefs. The protections afforded to religious objectors by the courts are very broad and individuals should start using them.

An individual joining a union for the first time should read the contract. If the contract has an option not to join, then he/she has a right to exercise that option.

If a person decides he/she wants union protection, but does not want to pay for unrelated activities, the courts have said that in order to accommodate sincerely held religious beliefs, the employee has a right to make the proper objection to become a "fair-share fee payer". A fair-share fee is a right to pay only that amount of dues representing the union's cost of negotiating and administering the collective bargaining agreement. The fair-share payer does not pay the remaining part of dues used for non-bargaining activities, such as political campaigns and lobbying.

Employees who have deeply held religious beliefs and do not want to pay any money, even the fair-share payment to the union, have the option to give it to a charity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. He/she should file the proper forms to become a conscientious objector, so that those dues are paid to a local that engages in no objectionable activities or to a charity.

Teachers Saving Children^® provides a simple, readable brochure which shows how to properly raise objections in order to withhold payment of dues for purposes that the educator believes are objectionable. Individuals who would like to contact Pat Perotti for more information on their rights as union members can reach him at his law office at 216-946-7656.