Washington ( CNN ) -- Labor unions must give nonmember workers `` fresh notice '' of unplanned increases in fees or assessments -- money that might be used for political purposes -- the Supreme Court ruled Thursday . The justices said those nonunion workers must be allowed to make an informed choice about how those kinds of fees are spent , allowing them to object and obtain a rebate . The 7-2 decision is a victory for Dianne Knox , a California state employee , who sought to opt out of a $ 12 million assessment imposed by the Service Employees International Union Local 1000 . She did not belong to SEIU , unlike most of her fellow government workers . State law allows unions to charge nonmembers annual dues -- called `` fair share fees '' -- to help support the collective bargaining efforts on behalf of all government workers , including the majority of workers who belong to the SEIU . At issue was whether nonunion employees may be constitutionally required to pay special fees to a union to help cover things like political spending on ballot measures . After two ballot measures were added in a special state election in 2006 , the union decided to impose a 25 % supplemental , separate , and temporary increase in fees to `` build a political fight-back fund . '' The money , said officials , would be used `` for a broad range of political expenses , including television and radio advertising , direct mail , voter registration , voter education , and get-out-the-vote activities in our work sites and in our communities across California . '' The high court noted nonunion members were not given a choice on whether they would `` opt in '' and pay into this special fund , and the money was taken directly out of their paychecks and pensions . About 28,000 current and former workers who were not members of SEIU sued , and the high court supported them . `` This aggressive use of power by the SEIU is indefensible , '' wrote Justice Samuel Alito . `` We see no justification for the union 's failure to provide a fresh ... notice '' of the special fee , whether it involves political activities or not.. `` When a public-sector union imposes a special assessment of dues increase , the union must provide a fresh ... notice and may not exact any funds from nonunion members without their affirmative consent , '' Alito added . The high court in past cases has ruled nonunion public sector workers can not be forced to pay for union activities not directly related to collective bargaining . That would include many kinds of political lobbying and advertising . Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed with their more conservative colleagues that fair notice must be given for nonmembers to opt out of pure political lobbying by unions . But they said the majority went too far by ruling that the requirement applies to other kinds opt-out fee collections as well , which they said was never argued or briefed by the opposing parties . In complete dissent were Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan . `` If the union 's basic administrative system does not violate the Constitution , then how could its special assessment have done so , '' asked Breyer , who delivered his dissent from the bench , a rarely exercised privilege . `` I do not believe the First Amendment requires a second objection opportunity to those nonmembers who did not object the first time . '' The case is Knox v. Service Employees International Union ( 10-1121 ) .
Labor unions must tell nonmember workers about new fees for political purposes . The Supreme Court has ruled that the government can require labor organizations to disclose their finances and spending on behalf of a union, but not how much money they spend directly supporting or opposing candidates in elections The justices say nonmember workers must be given the choice to `` opt in ''