Posted on 06/27/2018 7:11:40 AM PDT by jazusamo
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that pubic sector unions for state and local employees can’t force non-members to pay a “fair-share” union fee.
In a 5-4 ruling Tuesday, the court said the extraction of agency fees from non-consenting public sector employees violates the First Amendment.
The case centers on an Illinois law, similar to those in 22 other states, that allow public-sector unions to collect a “fair-share fee” from employees for non-political activities like collective bargaining, regardless of whether those employees belong to the union or not. Mark Janus, a state child support specialist at the center of the case, argued against having to give up about $45 from each paycheck to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 31. Doing so, he said, violates his First Amendment rights because it forces him to support the union’s messaging.
The union, AFSCME, argues it needs the “fair-share” funds to offset the significant costs it incurs negotiating working conditions for all employees. State laws allowing unions to collect these fees are justified, the union said, to avoid a situation where nonunion members get a "free ride."
A group of 15 public sector unions, warned the court in a friend of the court brief that eliminating fair-share fees would eviscerate public sector unions, depriving them of resources they need to perform their essential public functions.
“The elimination of fair-share fees would create an all-or-nothing choice for the workers whom unions represent: pay union dues or pay nothing but still receive the benefits a union provides,” they wrote.
“In that world, many rational employees will choose to become free riders.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
What do you think this is going to do to Mike Madigan? I think it's the beginning of his end. This is a major blow to his power. Thank God!
The unions haven’t been representing anything but far left political causes...
Hawaii is own, run and control by the union.
I'm sure he has been--it would be interesting, although none of my business, to know some of the details of just how he's been doing that, whether his lawyers helped, etc. But you're right: he has a big target on him going forward.
Roberts wrote expressively in his opinion that the President of the United States has the Constitutional power to affect immigration into this country and can limit where immigration comes from. Period. That's all Robert said. Anything past that was nothing more than spin from the lying democrat liberal lamestream media.
Gov Jerry Brown of calif I think in 1975 allowed Teachers Union, schools were near the top in the nation 1 or 2 now they are near the bottom 40 something..can’t fire bad ones...destroyed the legacy his father Edmund “Pat” Brown made for great calif schools and universities..
I know. I worked for a PEU in CA for 10 years.
While I am OK with that, I would much prefer it being Ginsberg, Sotomayer, Kagan or Breyer.
While Kennedy is wobbly, he occasionally rules properly.
The rest are leftist hacks who vote in lockstep.
A happy dream. :-)
Unions should be illegal. They are nothing but companies that demand another company must use their labor.
I can’t imagine a staffing company having that power over another company. Imagine if Accenture could vote itself the staffing company for any other company.
“Hi, GE. We’re your staffing company. All your employees are now Accenture employees and pay us a fee. We voted on it.”
That’s what unions do.
I heard that too!
““””””depriving them of resources they need to perform their essential public functions.””””
And which public functions would those be?????“
Funding the Democratic Party, silly....
The rate for the private sector was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%. In 2017, 7.2 million employees in the public sector belonged to a union, compared
with 7.6 million workers in the private sector.
Everything about these collectivist ‘union’ ninnies is sinister and ridiculous. ‘fair-share fee’ indeed
“The rate for the private sector was 6.7%”
I guess that’s o.k. with me because I don’t have to buy “union-made” stuff. Any way you slice it, PE unions should simply not be allowed by law, because the net effect is that they become a taxpayer-paid agit prop group for the RATs.
I Feel a great disturbance in the force. It as if hundreds of SEIU Union Leaders suddenly cried out at one, “Muh Yacht!!”
“...Mark Janus, a state child support specialist at the center of the case, argued against having to give up about $45 from each paycheck to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 31. Doing so, he said, violates his First Amendment rights because it forces him to support the union’s messaging....”
********************************************
Wow, $45 from each paycheck’s AFTER TAX money? Relief from that is like Christmas in July for the employees that are now doing forced involuntary servitude for their union masters.
In the case of Illinois I don't really see what the workers get for union dues. The state is broke and workers are lucky to get any raises at all. Most of these people have civil service seniority protection. If there are budget problems the low person on the totem pole is out. If there is a disciplinary problem, the union is unlikely to save the worker. They may drag out the firing a little longer, but the outcome is the same.
Not Tired Of Winning Yet
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.