Voluntary payments protected.
(1) It shall be unlawful to deduct from the wages, earnings or compensation of an employee any union dues, fees, assessments, or other charges to be held for, transferred to, or paid over to a labor organization, unless the employee has first presented, and the employer has received, a signed written authorization of such deductions, which authorization may be revoked by the employee at any time by giving written notice of such revocation to the employer.
(2) Deductions for political activities as defined in chapter 26, title 44, Idaho Code, shall not be deducted from the wages, earnings or compensation of an employee. (3) Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit an employee from personally paying contributions for political activities as defined in chapter 26, title 44, Idaho Code, to a labor organization unless such payment is prohibited by law.
Notes of Decisions
Ysursa v. Pocatello Educ. Ass'n, 555 U.S. 353 (2009).
· cites it 4× “* * * The Court of Appeals ruling that Idaho Code § 44-2004 (2) is unconstitutional with respect to local units of government is reversed.”
Pocatello Educ. Ass'n v. Heideman, 504 F.3d 1053 (9th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 7× “*1056 TASHIMA, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff labor organizations (“Plaintiffs”) sued officials of the State of Idaho, claiming that the Voluntary Contributions Act (“VCA”), Idaho Code §§ 44-2004 (2) and -2601 to -2605, violated Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights under the First…”
Utah Educ. Ass'n v. Shurtleff, 565 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “On February 24, 2009, the Court issued its opinion in Ysursa, upholding Idaho’s identically-named Voluntary Contributions Act, Idaho Code Ann. §§ 44-2004 , 2601 to 2605 (“Idaho VCA”).”
Pocatello Educ. v. Heidman (9th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 5× “OPINION TASHIMA, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff labor organizations (“Plaintiffs”) sued officials of the State of Idaho, claiming that the Voluntary Contributions Act (“VCA”), Idaho Code §§ 44-2004 (2) and -2601 to -2605, violated Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights under the First…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.