Bloomfield Hills, Michigan (December 16, 2004)<\/b> \u2014 Attorneys with the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation have filed arguments in the Michigan Court of Appeals opposing the State\u2019s precedent-setting actions to permit Michigan Education Association (MEA) union organizers to impose union monopoly bargaining on teachers at Brother Rice High School.<\/p>\n
In their amicus curiae<\/i> brief filed on behalf of a religious liberty public policy group known as the Acton Institute, Foundation attorneys urge the court to overturn a decision by the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC) claiming that the Catholic school falls under the jurisdiction of Michigan\u2019s compulsory collective bargaining laws. The MERC ruling allowed union officials to target Brother Rice teachers for unionization and to be declared monopoly bargaining representatives for the teachers who provide the church\u2019s religious instruction. Unless overturned, MERC\u2019s decision could ultimately result in union monopoly bargaining privileges extending into the school\u2019s hiring and firing practices, as well.<\/p>\n
Foundation attorneys argue that federal constitutional law and U.S. Supreme Court precedent preclude state regulation of the religious institution, and that state supervision of a church school violates the Establishment Clause of the federal constitution. Foundation attorneys also cite that Catholic Church doctrine and the ideology of the MEA union are incompatible, and that the Michigan state government has excessively entangled itself with the institution. <\/p>\n
The Foundation\u2019s brief asserts that Michigan state law was not constructed in a way to include Brother Rice in the jurisdiction of union representation and state regulation. Imposing unionization and state supervision over educators at Brother Rice would force the Church to negotiate specific terms of employment which run counter to church doctrine, including the subsidizing of abortions in the church-provided healthcare package. <\/p>\n
Foundation attorneys point out that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lemon v. Kurtzman<\/i> that the government cannot foster \u201cexcessive government entanglement with religion.\u201d Foundation attorneys argue that the Michigan Employment Relations Commission\u2019s oversight of collective bargaining agreements would amount to an \u201cexcessive entanglement\u201d in church activities because the Commission has acknowledged Brother Rice is \u201cphysically and financially\u201d part of the Catholic Church. Additionally, since hiring practices at the school necessarily involve religious beliefs, the state could be asked to pass judgment upon church doctrine to determine whether the school\u2019s refusal to bargain over certain terms is legitimately based on religious belief. <\/p>\n