Posts tagged Janus v. AFSCME
Worker Who Criticized Union Official Defeats Attempt to Slap Him with Restraining Order
October 26, 2023 // In the more recent dispute over the restraining order, the UIA chapter president sought such an order against Cruz because he made Facebook posts criticizing the union’s representation of employees and the chapter president’s performance, specifically describing the chapter president as “lazy.” The union official claimed that a restraining order was necessary because Cruz would have to be stalking him to know of his “lazy” behavior. The UIA chapter president identified no evidence other than the Facebook posts themselves. Foundation attorneys rebutted this outrageous theory. “Reynaldo Cruz’s Facebook posts are protected speech and activity that lawfully criticize and oppose the UIA President’s leadership, not ‘gestures or actions intended to intimidate, threaten, or pursue’ the union president or his family,” Cruz’s motion to dismiss reads. On October 17, 2023, a trial court judge dismissed the UIA official’s charges against Cruz.
FREEDOM FOUNDATION FILES PERC COMPLAINT AGAINST WFSE CITING DISCRIMINATION, INTERFERENCE WITH LABOR RIGHTS
October 11, 2023 // Additionally, it’s unlawful for exclusive bargaining representatives to “restrain or coerce an employee” in the exercise of their right to not join a union. Conditioning access to equitable representation on a worker joining a union coerces the employee to join the union. As for Fix, he was exclusively represented by WFSE for the purposes of collective bargaining. Therefore, WFSE owed him a duty of fair representation that was breached when Yestramski refused to communicate with him. Public employees like Todd Fix who have no desire to affiliate with unions are constantly bearing the price of exclusive representation regimes, the original sin of modern public-sector labor law principles. In exchange for their compliance with exclusive representation laws, workers have the right to be represented fairly by their exclusive representative. And they have a right to make their own choices about joining a union without fear of losing access to equitable representation.
Liberty Justice Center Defends Janus Rights in Alaska
October 6, 2023 // In the years since the Supreme Court issued its ruling, multiple states have passed laws to make it more difficult for employees to know and exercise their rights under Janus. In addition, multiple lower courts have refused to enforce the “affirmative consent” requirements set forth by the Supreme Court when employees have sought to enforce their Janusrights by alleging that they did not consent to pay unions freely or knowingly. “Unions have convinced states, government employers, and the lower courts to ignore one of the most important parts of the Janus decision,” said Liberty Justice Center Senior Counsel Jeffrey Schwab. “The Supreme Court must intervene and make clear that it meant what it said in Janus—workers must be fully informed of their rights before the union can claim any of their paycheck.” In their amicus brief, Mark Janus, the Liberty Justice Center, and the Illinois Policy Institute urge the Supreme Court to hear Alaska v. Alaska Employees Association and affirm that the Court’s ruling in Janus means that money cannot be withheld from employees on behalf of unions unless and until the government has clear evidence of the employees’ free and knowing consent.
Commentary: How popular are unions?
September 29, 2023 // So how popular are unions? People tend to support their existence and are sympathetic to the concerns of workers. But they don’t believe people should be forced to join and few are personally interested in joining one themselves.
Hartford teacher wins labor complaint against union
September 6, 2023 // Grande was disciplined by the Board of Education after two colleagues complained about his reaction to mandatory training on privilege. He was issued a letter of reprimand, saying he had made inappropriate and unprofessional comments during the training. Grande has pushed back against that reprimand saying he was asked his opinion on the training and gave an honest answer. HFT did file for arbitration on Grande’s behalf after they were made aware of their duty to fair representation, but it was too late, with more than six months elapsing between the second grievance denial and filing for arbitration, so their request was denied.
Opinion: Union Leaders Aren’t Fooling Anyone on Labor Day
September 6, 2023 // the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has formed a so called “Lavender Caucus” to advocate on its behalf for pro-LGBTQ legislation; the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) issued a resolution demanding stricter gun control laws; the National Education Association (NEA) quietly published a gender ideology resource guide, “Schools in Transition,” in 2015 that laid the groundwork for some of the craziest positions on gendered bathrooms, high school sports and pronoun usage confounding parents and teachers across the country; NEA President Becky Pringle in 2022 issued a statement on behalf of her union excoriating the U.S. Supreme Court for its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson overturning Roe v. Wade and sending the abortion question back to the state; and, United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA) President Cecily Myart-Cruz in 2021 asks her union to issue a resolution condemning the state of Israel for its “war crimes” against the Palestinians.
COMMENTARY Is a Worker Revolt Brewing After Michigan Repeals Its Right-to-Work Law?
September 5, 2023 // Michigan employees affected by this law don’t have to put up with this violation of their freedom of association. They don’t need to pay dues to a forced-membership organization. They don’t have to keep supporting a union’s radical political agendas. They don’t have to watch a portion of their paychecks going to pay for union oligarchies out of state. They certainly don’t need to pay for fancy dinners, cars, vacations, and political junkets and pad the pockets of union bosses. By tossing out the union altogether, employees can keep their money in their own hands and out of the hands of political machines and their elected attendants. The Center for Independent Employees, which assists employees seeking to prevent unionization at the workplace or remove an unwanted union, is already hearing rumblings of this revolution through our offices and our ground game in Michigan.
The Supreme Court’s Janus v. Afscme Sequel?
August 25, 2023 // Alaska’s courts have blocked Mr. Dunleavy’s plan from taking effect. In a May ruling, the state Supreme Court said that “neither Janus nor the First Amendment required the State to alter the union member dues deduction practices set out in the collective bargaining agreement.” This is a crabbed view of free speech and free association. Although Janus involved a union nonmember, Alaska tells the U.S. Supreme Court in its petition that “the decision applies to all involuntary fees and has clear application to members and nonmembers alike.” Consider the devious policies that make canceling a paycheck deduction into a “byzantine process,” Alaska says. In California, “certain public employees cannot stop their dues unless the union receives a signed revocation letter ‘postmarked’ precisely ‘between 75 days and 45 days before’ the employee’s ‘annual renewal date.’” The point is to trap workers and keep that dues money coming. The authorization form for the Alaska State Employees Association was even stricter, making union dues irrevocable except during a magical 10-day window each year, though the petition says the union eventually promised not to enforce it after the state sued.
Congress Should Protect Federal Workers from Union Coercion
August 10, 2023 // Any other business enterprise attempting to sell nearly irrevocable memberships without disclosing the terms up front would swiftly find itself in the sights of federal regulators. Just last month, the Federal Trade Commission sued Amazon in federal court for “failing to clearly and conspicuously disclose all material terms of the transaction” before signing people up for Prime memberships and “failing to provide a simple cancellation mechanism.” It’s time unions started playing by the same rules. The Paycheck Protection Act, just introduced in Congress by Representative Eric Burlison (R., Mo.), would increase union accountability by ending the collection of union dues via payroll deduction by federal agencies. Given the ubiquity and ease of electronic payment methods, there is simply no good reason to force taxpayers to subsidize a dues-collection system for a private, politically divisive special-interest group.