Posted on 06/30/2014 7:53:07 AM PDT by rktman
The Supreme Court says public sector unions can’t collect fees from home health care workers who object to being affiliated with a union.
The justices on Monday said collecting the fees violates the First Amendment rights of workers who are not union members.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Yes to Pro-Life Demonstrators
No to Obama’s recess appointments
Yes to Hobby Lobby
No to Unions
I am doing the dance of joy.
I am surprised by this ruling as I think the unions had a valid point, all the works in a union shop benefit from what the union negotiates, unless non-union people are settling for less. Not that I am that big a fan of unions, but over time, mostly long ago, they had their place.
It’s a very limited decision that doesn’t affect 99.9% of public employee unions.
Better than nothing.
Better and better today!
Does this cover ALL public sector unions or just the health care workers?
If so between this and Citizens United the dems must really be pooping their pants right now....
Unions don’t have any place now. They are nothing more than extortion rackets. They don’t really care about the workers. All they want are dues to line their pockets and those of Democrat politicians.
Careful now. Let’s not forget the legislative branch (the lyin’ king and his pen and phone) may yet take this issue up.
Good. but there’s a long way to go.
But, this was different. These “unions” were based on sham votes and Executive Orders of the governor.
In addition, these “unions” don’t negotiate SHIT for these FORCED members! Most of these in-home, hospice providers are given Federal government mandated fees, so the union does NOT have the authority to negotiate with the governor of a state for Federal hospice fees.
This was a SHAM to increase union dues and membership - PERIOD! It was Democrats helping the unions screw people over so that the Democrats could get some more money!
Compelling someone to pay union dues against their will is theft, and is not consistent with a free society.
Obama administration was specifically on the losing side on this one too (Solicitor General was an amicus curiae for the public sector unions/state of Illinois).
It may be these decisions that cause him to stage a little “Reichstag” event.
What you’re missing is in this case is that home health care workers aren’t employees of the government.
I am surprised by this ruling as I think the unions had a valid point, all the works in a union shop benefit from what the union negotiates, unless non-union people are settling for less. Not that I am that big a fan of unions, but over time, mostly long ago, they had their place.
As I understand it, this was much like the scam in Michigan they were claiming that the relatives who were doing the home healthcare of the patients that were being taken care of at their own home were state employees and were therefore ‘unionizable’ even if the were unwilling to do so.
The ruling specifically addresses the issue you mention.Here is the ruling
You do understand that the SEIU was forcing people who were acting as personal assistants providing home care to their relatives to pay union dues. These people are essentially private contractors paid by the state of Illinois. What is fair about that?
Another dissertation from the blithering idiot on the far left.
it is the same with the teachers' union in California... a teacher in California does not have to belong to the union, does not have to pay dues... but benefits from the negotiations... what the teacher will not get is representation from the union if he gets into any kind of legal dispute with the administration... i come from a family of teachers in California...
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.