Table Of Contentjpse 2:19-cv-00228 Document 1 Filed G1/10/19 Page 1of 18 Page ID #:1
1 |] Thomas Myers (CA SBN 120674)
[email protected]
SMITH & MYERS LLP
800 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 800
Los Angeles, California 90017
Telephone: (213) 613-2380
Facsimile: (213) 613-2395
ajv@nerworg
Mion L. Chappell (Pro Hac Vice Application to be Filed)
[email protected]
c/o NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK LEGAL
DEFENSE FOUNDATION, INC
2001 Braddock Road, Suite 600
11 |] Springfield, Virginia 22151
Telephone: (703) 321-8510
Facsimile: (703) 321-9319
2
3
4
5
© |] Angel J. Valencia (Pro Hac Vice Application to be Filed)
7
a
9
Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Classes He Secks to Represent
1s UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MICHAEL MCCAIN, for Himself and) Case No: 2:19-cv-00228
the Classes He Seeks to Represent,
® ) COMPLAINT -
0 Plaintifts, ) CLASS ACTION
)
aly. }) Constitutional Violation Action
» } (42 U.S.C. § 1983), Declaratory
VENTURA COUNTY FEDERATION Judgment, Injunctive Relief
23 || OF COLLEGE TEACHERS, AFT i}
34 || LOCAL 1828, AFL-CIO; AMERICAN)
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS; )
25 || VENTURA COUNTY COMMUNITY)
ag || COLLEGE DISTRICT, )
)
a Defendants. )
)
2
(COMPLAINT-CLAS® ACTION
+
Suarri & MERSLLP
‘St0 Ui Boer 8 20
eat tseran ac any e205
{hse 2:19-cv-00228 Document 1 Filed 01/10/19 Page 2 of 18 Page ID#:2
INTRODUCTION
1. Om June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court held it unconstitutional for|
[public-sector unions and employers to collec/deduct union dues or fees from
public employees without their affirmative consent and a knowing waiver of their
First Amendment tights. Jamus v. AFSCME, Council 31, 138 $.Ct. 2448, 2486
(2018).
2, Plaintiff Michael MeCain (“McCain”) is a public employee of the
Ventura County Community College District (“Ventura District”) and is
employed in a bargaining unit represented by the Ventura County Federation of}
[College Teachers, AFT Local 1828 (“AFT 1828"),
3, Affer being notified of MeCain’s decision to revoke any prior dues
authorization, Ventura District and AFT 1828, directly or indirectly, nonetheless
continued to deduct dues from his paychecks, in furtherance of the AFT’s
restrictive revocation policies.
4, AFT 1828 and Ventura District violate the First Amendment rights of|
McCain and of the proposed class of public employees subject to AFT 1828's
revocation policy, by collecting/deducting union dues from their wages without,
their knowing consent, thereby severely resuicting their exercise of their First
| Amendment right under Jara not to subsidize unions.
5, Defendants maintain and enforce policies, including the dues
deduction provisions of the existing collective bargaining agreement between
COMPLAINT-cLASS ACTION
oa
ATR A MVERSILP.
suo wits aden eB
Le Agr aia DOT
“eI GIS Pe NEES
2:19-cv-00228 Document 1 Filed OV/10/19 Page Sof 18 Page ID #3
AFT 1828 and Ventura District. Under these policies, AFT 1828 and Defendant
American Federation of Teachers (“AFT Netional”} (collectively called, “the
AFT") collects, directly of indirectly, union dues from the wages of public
employees, even from those who have notified the AFT of their resignation from
lunion membership and revocation of their prior dues deduction authorizations.
6. McCain brings this civil rights action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
lon tehalf of himself and all other similarly situated employees, seeking: (a) a
|judgment declaring the revocation restrictions and the deduction of union dues or
fees without the employees’ affirmative consent and knowing waiver of First
Amendment rights are unconstitutional and unenforceable; (b) judgment declaring
Article 18.2.4 of the collective bargaining agreement, which limits employees”
[dues deductions revacation rights to a yearly 15-day window, violates the First
[Amendment and is null and void; (c) injunctive celief that prohibits the
maintenance and enforcement of the unconstitutional policies, actions and
provisions, along with compensatory and nominal damages, and (d) costs and
Jeomeys” fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988,
IURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. This is an action that arises under the Federal Civil Rights Act of|
1871, 42 US.C. § 1983, to redress the deprivation, under color of state Law, of]
rights, privileges and immunities secured to Plaintiff McCain and all class|
members by the Constitution of the United States, particularly the First and|
COMPLAINT ~CLASSACTION
=
Le gr ahr 007
neginebaara Gipenae
SMITH 8 rrEnSLLP
se we oad ue 0
hse 2:19-cv-00228 Document Filed 01/10/19 Page 4of 18 Page ID#4
Fourteenth Amendments.
8 The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and
28 U.S.C. § 1343.
9. This ac
jon is an actual controversy in which Plaintiff McCain seeks|
a declaration of his rights under the Constitution of the United States. Pursuant to|
28 US.C. §§ 2201-2202, this Court may declare Plaintiff McCain's rights and
grant further necessary and proper relief based thereon, including injunctive relief|
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65.
1G, Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C, § 1391 because
the claims arise in this judicial district and division and Defendants operate and do
‘business in this judicial district and division.
PARTIE:
11. Plaintiff Michael McCain resides and works in Ventura County,
Califomia,
12. Defendant Ventura County Federation of College Teachers, AFT
Tocal 1828, AFL-CIO (“AFT 1828”), whose office is located at 816 Camarillo
[Springs Road, Suite B, Camarillo, California 93012, is a local public sector labor
‘mnion and an affiliate of Defendant American Federation of Teachers (“AFT
National”). AFT 1828 is the exclusive representative of ‘thousands of faculty
members throughout the Ventura District and is a party to a collective bargaining
agreement with the Ventura County Community College District.
(COMPLAINE CLASS ACTION
-
SMITH OVERS LLP
xs wr ae a 80
ta nar, Colla 017
ream eteaiio Pee oin 6.005
52 2:19-0v-00228 Document 1 Filed 01/10/19 Page Sof 18 Page ID #5
13, Defendant American Federation of Teachers (*AFT National”) is a
national labor union with whom Defendant AFT 1828 is affliated, and conducts
business throughout the Central District of California, It is headquartered at 555
|New Jersey Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001.
14, Defendant Veatura County Community College District, whose!
address is 761 Eest Daily Drive, Camarillo, California 93010, is a community
college district serving Ventura County, California, Itis responsible for deduoting
[dues from Plaintiff MeCain and other members of the bargaining mit and
remitting them to the AFT.
FA ATIONS
15, Plaintiff Michael McCain is a professor of mathematics and an
employee of the Ventura County Community College District.
16. At all relevant times, McCain has been subject to the exclusive
representation of the AFT and subject to the collective bargaining agreement
‘between Ventura District and the AFT.
17. On August 11, 2005, McCain signed the AFT’s dues checkoff|
authorization card that authorized the deduction of union dues from his wages. At
this time, MeCain was required, as a condition of employment, to either join the
junion as a fall member ox pay union forced fees even if he was a nonmember.
iit
a
‘COMPLAINT CLASS ACTION
+
se 2:19-4v-00228 Document Filed o1/10/19 Page 6 of 18 Page ID #5
18. On June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court in Janus held forced fee
requirements mconstitutianal and that public employees had a First Amendment
ight not to have union dues or fees deducted from their wages without their|
affirmative consent and knowing waiver of their First Amendment rights. 138
S.Ct. at 2486,
19. After Janus was decided, MoCain notified the AFT on August 27,
2018, in waiting, of his resignation as a member of the APT and that he did not
Jconsent to any deduction of union dues or fees from his wages. The AFT
responded in writing denying his request.
20, The AFT’s checkoff card signed by MeCain states:
“| hereby authorize the Ventura County Comunity
College District to withhold from my warrant the
constitutional monthly dues of the Venture County
Federation of College Teachers, AFT, Local 1828. 1
understand this authotization will remain in effect until
farther notice unless changed or terminated by me on
thity days" notice to the District Payroll Office and the
‘Verrtura County Federation of College Teachers.”
21. Nevertheless, Article 18.2. of the collective bargaining agreement]
lbecween the AFT and the Ventura District states a more restrictive revooation|
policy:
“Any employee who is paying dues may stop making
‘those payments by giving written notice to the Federation
during the period not less than thirty (30) and nat. more
then forty-five (45) days before: 1.) the annual
anniversary date of the employee's hire date or 2.) the
date of termination of the applicable contract between the
CCOBIPLAINT--CLASSACTION
&
Sony a MvERSLLE
ad Wd ou a
hse 2:19-cv-00228 Document1 Filed 01/10/19 Page 7 af 18 Page ID#7
employer and the Federation, whichever oveurs sooner,
unless the Federation and the employer are in subsequent
negotiations on a successor contract. The employer will
honor the employee’s cbeck-off authorizations unl
he/she has cevoked that authorization in writing during
the window period as authorized by the Federation,
invespective of the employee's membership in the
Federation. Any faculty member who is nota member of
the Federation or wha does not make application for
tuerabership within thirty (30) days of the effective date
of ‘Article or within thirty (30) days of the
‘commencement of assigned duties shall pay a service fee
to the Federation. At any time, a faculty member may
‘become a Faderation member...”!
22, Neither the AFT’s dues checkoff authorization nor the collective
bargaining agreement contain language that informs potential signatories: (1) that
they have a First Amendment tight not to subsidize the union and ite speech; or
(2) that, by signing the cards, they are waiving their First Amendment right to not
subsidize the AFT and its speech.
23. The AFT’s restrictive revocation policy is enforced by the Ventura
District that, in coordination with the APT and at its behest, deducts union dues}
{from employees’ wages and remits those monies to the AFT pursuant to dues}
deduction agreements and dues checkoff provisions. The AFT and Ventura
District have failed and refused to terminate their restrictive revocation poticy
* 2016-2018 Verna County Community Colles Dist Vetut Coon Federation of College tthe AFT
‘rela 12-4, Atel
‘raven oto-zee ae a0 617205
se 2:19-cv-00228 Dacument4 Filed 1/10/19 Page Bof1é Page ID #8
after McCain's notification of revocation of consent far such deductions.
24. Pursuant 10 its restrictive revocation policy, Defendants continued to
collect and deduct union dues from McCain and other employees after they
notified the AFT that they did not consent to paying union dues or forced fees.
Unless enjoined from so doing, the AFT and the Ventura District will continue 10
eollect/deduct union dues from employees,
25, On information and belief, Deftndants have enforced, and will
[continue to enforce, the restrictive revocation policy by collecting and deducting
lunion dues from employees who notified the APT that they do not consent to
paying union dues or fees.
(LASS. :ATIONS
26, Plaintiff McCain brings this case as a class action pursuant to Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1 XA) and ()(2), and, alternatively, 23(6)(3), for
himself and for all others similarly simuated, and any subolasses deemed
appropriate by this Com, as described in the following classes:
27. Plaintiff McCain is the class representative of the “Revocation
Class”, which consiets of individuals: (@) who are Venmura County Community
[Collage District employees exclusively represented by the AFT or one of its
‘affiliates for purposes of collective bargaining, (b) who resigned union
membership and revoked their consent to the payment of any union dues, and (c)
]who had or ere still having union dues deducted from their wages in spite of such,
‘COMPLAINT — CLASS ACTION
oe
@ 2:19-cv-00228 Document 1 Filed 01/10/19 Page of 18 Page ID #8
resignation and revocation request, The class includes everyone who comes|
‘within the class definition at any time from the time of resignation from union!
membership and revocation of consent to the payment of dues.
28. Plaintiff McCain is the class representative of the “Full Dues Class”,
which consists of Ventura County Community College District employees
exclusively represented by the AFT or one of its affiliates for purposes of
collective bargaining, who are subject or become subject to Defendants’ restrictive]
revocation policy.
29. Upon information and belief, there are hundreds, if not thousends, of)
class members in both classes described above. Their umber is so mumerons that
ljoinder is impractical. The precise number of class members is unknown to
Plaintif? MoCain, but it is clear that the number greatly exceeds the number to
make joinder feasible.
30, There are questions of law and fact cammon to all Revocation and
Pull Dues class members. Factually, all have had union dues deducted from their
wages and are oc were subject to the same or similar restrictive revocation policy.
For McCain and Ful! Dues class members, the dispositive legal question is
]whether Defendants? maintenance and enforcement of their restrictive revocation,
policy violates the First Amendment, For McCain and Revocation class members,
the dispositive legal question is whether the deduction and collection of full union
dues from employees’ wages violates their rights under the First Amendment.
‘COMPLAINT CLAS ACTION
>
a grt lie 7
‘ere etsaienran a) <La0s
SRMTH VERSE
(nie Bee, a 10
{he 2:19-cv-00228 Document 1 Filed 01/10/19 Page 10 of 18 Page ID #10
31, MeCain’s claims and defenses are typical of the Full Dues class
mernbers* claims because they concem whether Defendants’ restrictive revocation
policy unlawfully restricts employees’ Birst Amendment rights.
32, MeCain’s claims and defenses are typical of the Revocation class|
memabers’ claims because Defindents have seized and collected or are currently
seizing and collecting dues from McCain and Revocation class members in
violation of their First Amendment right to not subsidize union activity without
theie affirmative consent and known waiver of that First Amendment right, 2s
recognized by the U.S, Supreme Count in Janus v. AFSCME on June 27, 2018.
33, Plaintiff McCain can fairly and adequately represent the interests of|
both classes and has no conflict with other, similarly situated class merabers.
McCain has no interest antagonistic to others who have been subjected by
Defendants to the aforementioned restrictive revocation policy and union dues
deductions scheme,
34, Plaintiff MeCain’s counsel has considerable experience handling,
class actions and the types of claims asserted in the instant complaint. Moreover,
Plaintiff McCain’s counsel is knowledgeable in the applicable law and possesses
the necessary resources for committing to representing the class.
35, The Revocation Class identified above can be maintained under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b{1)(A) because Defendants’ duty to cease
the union dues deductions and collections applies equally ta McCain and class|
COMPLAINT C1A88 ACTION
Ae
