The thesis of this Article is that, now conscripted into the fray, the NLRB must consider free speech and association values embodied in the Constitution and laws when deciding Taft-Hartley dues objector issues. Only then can the NLRB fulfill its congressional mandate, recently discovered and described in Beck, to develop a coherent body of law that accommodates potentially explosive confrontations between dues objectors' right of free expressive association and the union majority's statutory right to organize and bargain collectively on behalf of all represented employees, including dues objectors.
To develop this thesis, the threshold task is to demonstrate that although most of the pre-Beck dues objector litigation nominally focused on statutory interpretation, constitutional values largely determined the cases' outcomes. The Article also demonstrates that these constitutional values provide some measure of internal cohesion to decisions that at times seem incoherent.
Roger C. Hartley, Constitutional Values and the Adjudication of Taft-Hartley Act Dues Objector Cases, 41 HASTINGS L.J. 1 (1989).