5 USC 7114(a)(1)

§ 7114. Representation rights and duties.

(a)(1) A labor organization which has been accorded exclusive recognition is the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit it represents and is entitled to act for, and negotiate collective bargaining agreements covering, all employees in the unit. An exclusive representative is responsible for representing the interests of all employees in the unit it represents without discrimination and without regard to labor organization membership.

That's why many times you'll hear a union tell a non-payer that they have to represent that employee but they don't have to try hard or win their case.

ATC@ZDC wrote: [TO: ihate2fly]
This refers to things like negotiations where you can't say "members shall have weekends off and non-members shall have Tue/Thu off". In other words, you can't have two sets of rules - one for members, one for non-members. All agreements must NOT differentiate between union member status.

If i remember the court case from my previous post, it was a case where the grievant was trying to say they can force the union to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on his/her grievance. The grievant tried to argue that they (the grievant) had complete control on whether a grievance goes forward or not - and if they chose to go forward, the union must pick up the tab.

The courts ruled that unions needn't go forth because the law allows for the grievant to have their own attorney.

I remember this case because of my own experience with a grievant. This guy threw a party at his house. For reasons i can't remember, the cops were called. The cops found cocaine in his apartment. He was terminated immediately. He called me (i was union prez at the time) and i told him i'd respond to the agency proposal, but beyond that the union would opt out. It was a loser case.

<<That's why many times you'll hear a union tell a non-payer that they have to represent that employee but they don't have to try hard or win their case.>>

Once it gets to an adverse action (loss of pay - suspension, removal, etc.) the union can opt out and not be held hostage by the grievance. Actually, the union needn't pursue every grievance anyway - they can pick and choose.

As for "not trying hard" for a non-member. If i can paraphrase a case from many years ago, "It's not illegal to be incompetent" as a union representative. In other words, i may represent somebody by simply handing them a copy of the grievance article and wishing them a good day.