|
Queen v. NEA |
For media inquiries, please contact:
Lisa Gates, vice president of communications
(614) 224-3255 or Lisa@BuckeyeInstitute.org
Background on the Case
Key Questions in the Case: Can a union continue to collect dues for the duration of the union contract from people who have quit the union and are no longer members? Can a union place limitations on when and how a member may leave the union and impose a penalty for leaving?
On June 27, 2018, the United States Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, holding that public employees cannot be forced to support political speech or other activities without their affirmative consent. This opinion reinforced the law regarding public employees’ rights to avoid compelled payments to the unions chosen to represent them.
Despite the historic court decision, many government unions have refused to recognize workers’ Janus rights and have continued to take money from public employees whom the unions themselves have acknowledged have quit the union and are, therefore, no longer union members. Using a legal sleight-of-hand to claim that workers can quit the government union, but they must keep paying union dues until they request to opt out, which they can do only during a specified opt-out window that may be months or even years in the future, government unions claim that they can keep taking money from workers regardless of the fact that these workers are not members of the union.
These government unions claim that the employees—in this case, Beth Queen—signed a contract authorizing the unions to keep collecting membership dues from employees even after they are no longer members of the union. Ohio’s law simply does not allow this unethical practice, and it is time for the court to tell the unions and the government that their practices are illegal and that they must stop taking money from workers.
In Queen v. NEA, The Buckeye Institute is asking the court to order the government union to:
- Stop charging Ms. Queen’s credit card for union dues;
- Refund the money taken from her after she quit the government union;
- Issue an injunction to prevent further union membership dues charges to her credit card; and
- Award Ms. Queen’s court costs.
About Buckeye’s Client
For more than 30 years, Beth Queen has been a high school science teacher, teaching students at Poland Seminary High School for 26 years. She didn’t set out to be a teacher. Ms. Queen started her career in pharmaceutical sales, but when she started her family, she decided to add a teaching degree to her biology degree so that she could make a career change. Now, she happily spends her days teaching ninth-grade students biology, anatomy, and physiology, as well as college-level students (conducted through an agreement with Youngtown State University) biology. For Ms. Queen, the best moments of teaching are when students visibly or verbally understand complex ideas they didn’t think they could understand.
Ms. Queen was happy with the Poland Education Association’s representation for most of her teaching career. She was a member of multiple unions in multiple districts for decades, even serving on union committees. That was until the union negotiated away part of Ms. Queen’s pay. Currently, any Poland biology teacher who teaches college courses for Youngstown State University receives a stipend for the extra courses. Ms. Queen was one of Poland’s teachers who took on this additional work, teaching biology courses and the associated lab courses that are required.
That will change in the 2025-2026 school year under the new collective bargaining agreement negotiated by the union. In this new contract, the union approved the removal of the stipend that paid for teachers to teach the required biology labs. In effect, the union agreed to a cut in pay for science teachers even though they would teach the same number of courses. Not only did the union agree to cut Ms. Queen’s pay by nearly $9,000, but they didn’t talk to her—or the other science teacher who taught the course—about the possibility of a pay cut, and the union didn’t tell teachers that it was a part of the new collective bargaining agreement until it was time for teachers to vote on the agreement.
A pay cut is not what members expect their union to negotiate for them, so Ms. Queen quit the Poland Education Association and its affiliates, the Ohio Education Association and National Education Association. And while the union acknowledges she is no longer a member, it refuses to stop charging Ms. Queen’s credit card. So not only did the union negotiate lower pay for Ms. Queen, but it also keeps taking money from her for doing so.
Facts of the Case
Current Status
Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas
Originally Filed
June 12, 2025
Case Number
2025 CV 01524
Lawyers
David C. Tryon, director of litigation, The Buckeye Institute
Jay R. Carson, senior litigator, The Buckeye Institute
Alex M. Certo, legal fellow, The Buckeye Institute
J. Simon Peter Mizner, legal fellow, The Buckeye Institute
Claims in the Case
Charging a worker who has quit the union membership dues is illegal because the “contract” between the union and the employee was rescinded or voided. This assertion is based upon Ohio contract law, specifically the doctrines of rescission based on mutual repudiation, unenforceable penalty, and unjust enrichment.
The Buckeye Institute’s client is asking for damages in the amount of the union membership dues taken from her after she quit the government union, and she is requesting an injunction to prevent further charges for union membership dues.
Related Cases
Chandler v. OAPSE
Littlejohn v. AFSCME
Sheldon v. OAPSE
Swanner v. OAPSE
Vanderveer v. OAPSE
Timeline of the Case
June 12, 2025
The Buckeye Institute files Queen v. NEA in Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas.
