Posts tagged opt-out
BACKGROUNDER: Worker’s Choice Act. Sponsored by Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO)
December 14, 2023 // President of Institute for the American Worker F. Vincent Vernuccio said, “Rep. Eric Burlison’s Worker’s Choice bill empowers both workers and unions. It allows workers to say “no thanks” to unwanted representation and unions to say “goodbye” to workers who are not interested in accepting or paying for their services. We applaud this commonsense legislation made possible by the Congressman’s leadership.
STOCKTON INTERPRETER’S LAWSUIT SHOWS HOW FAR CSEA WILL GO TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE OF DISSENTERS
December 7, 2023 // To justify its actions, the union claimed Baker had signed a subsequent dues-authorization form in 2020 that included the opt-out window provision. But when she asked to see the document, the union refused. Through her attorneys, Baker was finally able to negotiate a settlement with CSEA in July 2022. Under its terms, her CSEA membership and dues deductions would stop immediately, and she would be reimbursed for the dues that had been deducted from her pay since April. In return, Baker agreed to release CSEA, its officers and agents from any and all claims, demands, obligations or causes of action through the date of execution of the settlement agreement, including claims for legal fees. The union also acknowledged for the first time that Baker had not been a member since April 2022 and enclosed a copy of the dues authorization she had allegedly signed two years earlier.
L’Oréal Employee Hits Union with Federal Charges for Illegal Dues Deductions, Threats for Seeking to Oust Union
December 6, 2023 // According to charge, union agent threatened: “The union is like a big mafia…something bad is going to happen to you” The election to decertify RWDSU, which took place October 19 and 20, is currently the subject of objections from Hoyos Lopez. The objections assert that union officials unlawfully interfered with the election through their intimidating actions during the September 22 meeting, as well as through campaign misrepresentations and racially-charged tactics. Hoyos Lopez’s federal charges, which she filed after submitting her election objections, state that employees she believed were acting on behalf of the union targeted her after she attempted to defend the integrity of the election. On November 27, “a L’Oréal contractor…intimidated [Hoyos Lopez]” and told her that “people say you have to leave because you have problems with the union.” The charges argue that all of these actions by RWDSU union officials and alleged union agents are clear violations of Hoyos Lopez’s rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law the NLRB is charged with enforcing. Section 7 protects workers’ right to refrain from union activities.
FREEDOM FOUNDATION DEMAND LETTER FREES ANOTHER CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEE
November 15, 2023 // Mr. Purciel sent a letter to AFSCME Council 57 exercising his constitutional right to leave the union. The union ignored him. Mr. Purciel also contacted the payroll officer for the County of El Dorado and requested that they stop making deductions from his lawfully earned wages and providing his money to the union. The government payroll department told Mr. Purciel that they would not end the deductions without the direction of the union. This is an unfortunate consequence of the statutory scheme operating under California Government Code Section 1157.12, which forces public employees to direct requests that “cancel or change deductions for employee organizations to the employee organization, rather than to the public employer.”
U.S. Supreme Court will consider taking up Alaska union dues case no sooner than December
November 8, 2023 // Politically conservative organizations, including the Buckeye Institute, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, and the Goldwater Institute, have submitted documents in support of the state’s case. Those organizations, plus the state of Kansas (which also submitted documents in support of Alaska) are hoping that the Supreme Court will reinterpret its 2018 case and effectively put new restrictions on public employee unions. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that unions could not automatically collect so-called “fair share” fees from workers who benefited from union contracts but declined to formally join a union.
City Workers Ditch Unions, Skip Dues, Following Supreme Court Ruling
November 2, 2023 // Pre-Janus, public sector employees had the option to explicitly opt out of union membership thanks to an earlier Supreme Court decision but still had to pay “agency fees” out of their paychecks to the unions. Union leaders, including New York City’s Municipal Labor Committee, warned before the decision of potentially large declines in union membership if signing up became optional. Any dramatic loss of dues-paying union members could threaten unions’ operations or even their ability to exist – a possibility on the horizon in some so-called “right to work” states.
Supreme Court ruled public sector workers cannot be forced to pay dues; unions take them anyway
October 28, 2023 // After the Janus ruling, Ms. Quezambra sought to invoke her rights to stop the involuntary union dues payments, demanding she be refunded going back to 2013. The union refused on the grounds that she had allowed the union to make the deductions. This was news to Ms. Quezambra. The union “presented Ms. Quezambra a membership and dues deduction authorization card containing a forged signature that she purportedly signed. Ms. Quezambra did not sign this card,” her complaint states.
Record number of public employees abandoned their unions this quarter
October 10, 2023 // “I couldn’t be more proud of the work the Freedom Foundation is doing to help people keep more of their hard-earned paychecks and stop funding distant, bloated, ideological government unions," Freedom Foundation CEO Aaron Withe said in a statement. "These aren’t merely statistics; they represent thousands of public employees exercising their constitutional right not to be forced to fund union activity as a condition of employment. “It’s gratifying to know that as the cost of everyday goods and services continues to rise, our work is directly helping people put more gas in their car or food on their table rather than line the pockets of union bosses who back the very policies causing many of the country’s economic hardships,” Withe said. Public unions nationwide have about 7 million members and subsequently collect over $5 billion annually in dues. As the average annual rate of dues is $1,000, the Freedom Foundation estimates that $13 million was saved with the third quarter opt-outs alone.
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.
ALASKA CASE GIVES SCOTUS A CHANCE TO REINFORCE JANUS
October 3, 2023 // Unfortunately, lower courts — including the Alaska Supreme Court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals — have been reluctant to hold either states or unions to that standard. If the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, it will effectively be asked to specifically apply to public employers the majority opinion issued just five years ago in Janus. If the court rejects the petition, the Alaska Supreme Court’s decision will stand. But even if the court takes up the case, a decision isn’t likely before winter. Most likely, months or years of written and oral arguments could be forthcoming. “Unless you agree to enforce it, even a landmark ruling like Janus is just a piece of paper,” Stahlfeld said. “Because unions and activist judges have been allowed to act as if Janus never happened, states like Alaska that want to comply with the ruling have been obliged to adopt legislation reinforcing what should have happened all along.”