Posted on 07/08/2018 5:55:51 PM PDT by Beave Meister
Justice is coming for unions that forced non-members to pay "non-political" agency fees that went to prop up Democratic candidates. Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that forcing workers who disagree with a union to make these payments anyway violates the workers' First Amendment rights.
Less than a week after that ruling, Janus v. Association of Federal, State, City, and Municipal Employees (FSCME), seven California teachers have filed a class-action lawsuit to recoup unjustly forced fees.
"This lawsuit will enable teachers like me to recover the agency fees that we were wrongly forced to pay against our will," Scott Wilford, the plaintiff in the new lawsuit, told Education Week. Wilford filed the lawsuit in the Central District of California's federal court on Tuesday.
Wilford and six others filed the class-action lawsuit against the National Education Association (NEA), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and others. The suit seeks "redress for the defendants' past and ongoing violations of their constitutionally protected rights. The defendants have violated the representative plaintiffs' constitutional rights by, among other things, forcing them to pay fair share service fees as a condition of their employment."
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Will the Unions go to the Democrats for their cash back ,Oh wait they spent or pocketed it
Take that, NeverTrumpers and Clintonistas!
Those teachers will not see a cent. The unions will fight it. They are not about giving money back to anyone, least of all their members.
Git ‘em! Git ‘em!
Good to see some actions on this. Aside from suing to get money back, has the payments now stopped?
Winning!
As far as I know people still pay until they tell union to stop taking money from them.
I thought the heart of the ruling was that they had to get explicit permission to deduct
We just negotiated a contract with management at a public college in Maine. Only members of our bargaining unit who have voluntarily joined the union will continue to pay dues.
All unit members who are not union members will no longer pay “agency fees.” The union negotiator agreed with management that ended the provision of dues payments for non members.
The law requires unions to get permission in advance to collect fees from union employees. So what used to be an opt out rule is not a mandatory opt in. If you don’t opt in, you don’t pay.
Of course, places like California will sue in the courts for stays and take 20 years to implement this ruling.
I know of one place where it was mandatory to choose union dues or agency fee. That changed with the court ruling. They do not give out the form anymore. If employee wants to join they have to contact union.
F the filthy unions.
Just plain awesome!
Just plain awesome!
“They are not about giving money back to anyone, least of all their members.”
except in this case it’s NON-members who were forced to pay unconstitutionally who are asking for their money back ...
There are plenty of pretty damn good lawyers who will be happy to take on this case. It represents a lot of money. It was great that this river of illicit cash to the labor unions was cut off. Clawing some of it back would be the cherry on top.
More winning....and chuckling.
Non-starter. It wasn’t officially unconstitutional until last week.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.