Agency stores are common in the school environment in many places. A union and a school board may enter into agency enterprise agreements if workers refuse union membership but are still part of collective bargaining units. These workers are often required to pay service fees, although legal issues relating to these rights have led to significant litigation in the area of collective bargaining. Under these schemes, workers have the option of joining the union and paying all dues or, failing that, paying only a service fee to cover the direct costs of collective bargaining. An agency, a workplace where union members pay union dues and other employees pay service fees to the union to cover the costs of collective bargaining. An agency enterprise agreement allows the employer to hire both trade unionists and non-unionized workers without harming the union; practice is seen as a form of union security. The legality of agency operations varies considerably from country to country and these agreements are generally highly regulated in industrialized countries. If the agency`s shop is illegal, as is the case in the labour law of U.S. public sector unions, a « fair sharing commission » can be agreed by the union and the employer.   The provision requires non-union workers to pay a « fair proportional fee » to cover the costs of the union`s collective bargaining. The « fair share » is similar to the agency shop, but it is generally more restrictive, which can be charged to the non-member. [Clarification needed]   In Canada, agency fees are generally referred to as a marginal formula.
 In the United States, in June 2018, Janus declared unconstitutional the mandatory payment of agency fees for non-unionized public sector employees to Janus against AFSCME. In the United States, the Supreme Court upheld the legal admissibility of agency service fees for unskilled employees in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education 1977. The Court of Justice ruled that a state employer and the union could enter into an agreement requiring workers to pay service fees for agencies that include collective bargaining, contract management and complaint adjustment costs. However, Mr. Abood said that the protest by union employees had a constitutional right to withhold payment of agency fees that supported political and ideological causes. In other words, the challenge of union workers could be forced to pay only expenses directly related to collective bargaining and mandatory service charges for agencies could not be used by unions to subsidize ideological or political causes or perspectives. On the basis of the abood, all civil servants had the constitutional right to prevent a union from spending some or all of its agency fees for political contributions or costs related to the promotion of political opinions that had nothing to do with the union`s duties as an exclusive negotiator.