FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 06/03/2014 9:31:29 AM PDT by jazusamo
In the first year since the Wolverine State adopted a right-to-work law in 2013, SEIU Healthcare Michigan lost a staggering 80 percent of its members.
The case illustrates a dirty secret of the modern labor movement: A lot of its rank and file members don't want to be in a union in the first place and will leave if given the chance.
What right to work did in Michigan, the Supreme Court might soon do nationally: In the case of Harris v. Quinn, the justices must decide if Illinois state government can force its own public sector employees to participate in a union. If the ruling is "no," that could effectively extend right-to-work laws to all public sector employees.
The possibility has labor law experts closely watching the case. About half of all union members nationally - more than 7 million people - work in the public sector. Many, possibly a majority, are in workplaces that were unionized before they were hired, so they never had a chance to decide for themselves. Many may leave, hurting Big Labor's already-sliding membership numbers.
The court could announce the ruling as early as Monday.
The Roberts court has already delivered a few blows to Big Labor, such as limiting the ability of unions to raise political funds from unwilling members in 2012's Knox v. SEIU.
Another tough blow is not certain though. During January's oral arguments, conservative Justice Antonin Scalia caused a stir by appearing to lean towards Big Labor's take on the case. He could be the swing vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Oral arguments do not really tell you a lot about how the judges will vote. They are often opportinities for 'devils advocate' chatter.
Agreed...I find it hard to believe Justice Scalia would back Bid Labor on this but looks like we’ll know soon.
Agree... public sector unions are implicitly “the employer” (gov’t) and the “employees” (union) negotiating against a third party (taxpayer) without their consent.
Bump. One of the reliable pillars of the Dem party is the unions, particularly the public unions. Take them down. An article V convention should have as an amendment just what you said; outlaw public unions. Besides, the unions are in direct conflict of interest from the taxpayers.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
No prob and no apologies necessary, my friend, you do a great job.
It would totally upend the Democratic Party in Illinois. They have a captive voting block of what would mainly be conservative voters trapped by union contracts.
Yes it would. The rumor is that there may be a decision on this tomorrow morning sometime, I’ll be watching for it.
Ping me if it comes down. I pray that’s the break Illinois needs. I’m on the verge of moving.
Will do, whether it’s tomorrow or later.
According to Scotusblog they expect the ruling at 10:00 am tomorrow
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/harris-v-quinn/
http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/01/argument-recap-public-employee-unionism-under-fire/
Argument recap: Public employee unionism under fire
Thanks. Hopefully I’ll know because it will be headline making and the MSM will go nuts.
Looks like it won’t be today. It should hit the MSM like a tornado no matter how the decision goes. I’ll ping you if I post an article.
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.