Posts tagged Harris v. Quinn
Op-ed: Josh Hawley’s union-friendly bill may open the door to right-to-work
March 17, 2025 // Hawley, who opposes right-to-work laws, may be inadvertently laying the groundwork for a national version of that same policy, protecting private-sector workers across America from getting fired for not paying union fees. Hawley’s Faster Labor Contracts Act—which the Teamsters union has already endorsed—is billed as a means of stopping employers from delaying negotiations with labor unions. Under current law, businesses and unions are required to negotiate in good faith, and there’s no deadline for an agreement because workers and job creators need time to reach the best deal.
MICHIGAN: Unions licensed to deceive (editorial)
December 28, 2024 // With the enactment of Senate bills 790 and 791 in October, Michigan homecare providers are classified as public employees. Those are individuals — many of whom care for elderly or disabled family members — who receive a stipend from government programs for their work and sacrifice. The state law sets up homecare workers to be pressured into union membership and made to pay dues to the Service Employees International Union. Those caregivers get no benefit from union membership, because the amount of the stipend is decided legislatively and is not subject to collective bargaining. Providers need every cent available to them as they minister care.
The Liberty Justice Center Sues Union for Forcing Jewish Lawyers to Support Speech They Consider Antisemitic
April 12, 2024 // Congress recently launched an investigation into the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys due to whistleblower reports of antisemitism by union members. The Liberty Justice Center is suing the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys, Legal Aid Society, and the City of New York on behalf of Mr. Levine and Mr. Popper, alleging that these defendants are violating the attorneys’ First Amendment rights by forcing them to subsidize political speech as a condition of employment. The Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment prohibits the government from compelling a person to subsidize a union’s speech. In Janus v. AFSCME, the Court held that a government could not force its employees to pay a union as a condition of their employment. And in Harris v. Quinn, the Court held that a government could not compel recipients of government funds, through a state program to provide services to other private individuals, to pay money to a union.
HOUSE DEMOCRATS ADVANCE SEIU BILL IN OREGON KNOWING IT WOULD STRIP CAREGIVERS OF THEIR RIGHTS
February 29, 2024 // Specifically, Oregon’s HB 4129 would require the state to contract with up to two private vendors to administer part of the state’s Medicaid-funded homecare program. By doing so, it would create a new employment model governed by private-sector labor law, under which caregivers would lose their protections under the Harris ruling. SEIU 503 is the union purporting to represent Medicaid-compensated homecare workers in Oregon, and it’s has taken a big hit since Harris.
Opinion: Radical Unions Elected Biden, Chaos Ensues on International Front, but Others Bank on Same Formula
October 26, 2023 // Additionally, Biden unveiled a $400 billion American Jobs Plan designed to force thousands of Medicaid home healthcare providers back into the union membership they declined following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Harris v. Quinn. Unofficially, Biden waited weeks to survey the damage in fire-ravaged Hawaii and still hasn’t visited East Palestine, Ohio, where a 38-car train wreck last February created a huge hazardous waste disaster. But he saw fit to wade into a private-sector labor dispute by siding with the striking United Auto Workers and became the first sitting president in history to join a picket line.
JANUS V. AFSCME AT FIVE: GOVERNMENT UNION MEMBERSHIP AT RECORD LOWS
June 21, 2023 //
Unions Are Stealing Dues Through Forgery. The Supreme Court Must Step In.
February 12, 2023 // The Freedom Foundation, a national union watchdog group, has filed about a dozen cases where unions allegedly forged people’s signatures in order to keep taking money from their paychecks. It’s an issue that has become so pervasive the Supreme Court must eventually step in and correct the 9th Circuit’s decision.
Supreme Court Misses an Opportunity to Protect Workers from Public-Sector Unions
January 26, 2023 // The Supreme Court decided today that it will not grant certiorari in the case Wright v. SEIU Local 503, one of several union-forgery cases currently working their way through the court system. By not hearing the case, the Court is allowing confusion about public-sector workers’ constitutional rights to persist. The Freedom Foundation, a conservative union-watchdog group, has found about a dozen cases where unions allegedly forged someone’s signature in order to keep taking money from their paycheck. Though it may seem like a simple question, lower-court rulings have failed to address the issue head-on.
THREE LAWSUITS, ALL INVOLVING UNION FORGERY, APPEALED TO SUPREME COURT
December 22, 2022 // In all three cases, dues continued to be deducted from the plaintiffs’ paychecks long after they requested to opt out because the union claimed they had signed a membership form stipulating they could only leave during a two-week annual window. In fact, none of the workers had signed any such authorization and, when the unions were forced to provide documentation, each turned out to be a crude forgery. Zielinski v. SEIU 503, Wright v. SEIU 503, Cindy Ochoa,