Two years ago, the Michigan Education Association collected
signatures from teachers at a school in Birmingham. The teachers wanted the
union to represent them in labor talks, but this was no ordinary union activity.
The school in question was Brother Rice High School, which is Roman Catholic,
and none of Michigan’s Catholic schools is unionized.
The issue became a legal dispute when the school’s board
objected to the MEA’s representing Brother Rice employees. Recently, the
Michigan Court of Appeals weighed in on the case, holding that labor unions
cannot organize teachers at Catholic schools in Michigan. The decision is an
important setback for the MEA in its efforts to extend its influence and income.
The MEA had in fact received a sufficient number of
signatures from teachers at Brother Rice High School to allow an election to
determine whether it would become the teachers’ exclusive bargaining
representative (a union gains this power when more than half of the employees
voting agree to unionize). The MEA then petitioned the Michigan Employment
Relations Commission to set the election.
Brother Rice, in turn, asserted that the formation of a
teachers union violated its First Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution,
suggesting that the union’s presence at Brother Rice would compromise its
religious mission. The school also argued that the election was not appropriate
under Michigan law. Nevertheless, the state Employment Relations Commission
scheduled the election, which the Court of Appeals then postponed while it
considered the case.
In the court’s ruling in Michigan Education Association v.
Christian Brothers Institute of Michigan, the judges’ opinion initially noted
that religion permeates the educational experience at Brother Rice. It realized
that substantial First Amendment concerns would be involved if the MEA were
allowed to unionize the teachers, although it did not rule on that specific
Instead, the court simply held that Michigan’s labor law was
similar to federal labor law. Since the United States Supreme Court had decided
in National Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago that federal
labor law prevented Catholic school teachers from being unionized, the state
Court of Appeals concluded that the rationale in the Catholic Bishop ruling was
persuasive in this case, as well.
Perhaps recognizing the weakness of their position, the MEA
did not appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court. Therefore, the Court of Appeals’
opinion maintains the status quo, given that before this lawsuit, there were no
teachers unions in Michigan’s Catholic schools. Nevertheless, this is a big loss
for the MEA.
The union cannot now attempt to generate more dues by
unionizing Catholic school teachers. Almost all public school teachers are
already represented by either the MEA or tæhe Detroit Federation of Teachers,
and the Catholic schools were seen as a remaining potential source of revenue.
The ruling also has important implications for the state’s
Catholic schools. If the MEA had been able to establish a foothold in their
labor negotiations, it would likely have driven up employee costs, forcing at
least some of the schools, which generally operate on a bare-bones budget, to
close. Ultimately, the Court of Appeals’ ruling recognized religious education’s
unique place in our society, and it has thereby prevented serious harm.
Patrick J. Wright is senior legal analyst for the Mackinac
Center for Public Policy, a research and educational institute headquartered in