Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 72,885
In the wake of a 2018 Supreme Court ruling that public-sector unions cannot force non-members to pay a fee for workplace representation, a new challenge to union power is taking shape.
The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Janus v. AFSCME that unions could not extract what’s called an “agency fee” from non-members who happened to work in the same place a union had “exclusive representation” rights. But one group argues that in saying it was unconstitutional to force people to fund labor unions’ speech with their own money, the high court also indicated that the legitimacy of “exclusive representation” itself could be up for debate.
"The issue with regard to exclusive representation was not presented to the court in the Janus case, but the court three separate times expressed grave concerns about the constitutionality of those provisions," said Robert Alt, chief executive of the Buckeye Institute, a free-market think tank. He says that the move by Justice Samual Alito in crafting the Janus opinion was an "invitation for litigants" to bring cases challenging exclusive representation.
“We took that hint and have brought multiple cases in order to raise that question up to the Supreme Court," he told Fox News.
Alt and the Buckeye Institute are representing Jonathan Reisman -- an economics professor at the University of Maine who was for years active as a grievance officer with his local union -- in Reisman v. Associated Faculty of the University of Maine, a case challenging state-mandated exclusive representation schemes as unconstitutional.
Reisman lost his case in the First Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this month, but Alt said his institute intends to file a petition in early January asking the Supreme Court to hear it.
Over time, Reisman grew frustrated by the local union's association with two larger labor organizations whose political speech he didn't embrace: the Maine Education Association and the National Education Association.
While Reisman says in a profile on the Buckeye Institute's website that he was happy the Supreme Court ruled in Janus he would not have to fund union activities, he argues that is not enough. Maine has a law requiring any workplace in which 50 percent of the employees vote to be represented by a union to allow that group “exclusive representation” of all employees in that bargaining unit. This means Reisman cannot negotiate the terms of his employment for himself – the union speaks for him.
More at: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/challenge-to-union-power-janus
The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Janus v. AFSCME that unions could not extract what’s called an “agency fee” from non-members who happened to work in the same place a union had “exclusive representation” rights. But one group argues that in saying it was unconstitutional to force people to fund labor unions’ speech with their own money, the high court also indicated that the legitimacy of “exclusive representation” itself could be up for debate.
"The issue with regard to exclusive representation was not presented to the court in the Janus case, but the court three separate times expressed grave concerns about the constitutionality of those provisions," said Robert Alt, chief executive of the Buckeye Institute, a free-market think tank. He says that the move by Justice Samual Alito in crafting the Janus opinion was an "invitation for litigants" to bring cases challenging exclusive representation.
“We took that hint and have brought multiple cases in order to raise that question up to the Supreme Court," he told Fox News.
Alt and the Buckeye Institute are representing Jonathan Reisman -- an economics professor at the University of Maine who was for years active as a grievance officer with his local union -- in Reisman v. Associated Faculty of the University of Maine, a case challenging state-mandated exclusive representation schemes as unconstitutional.
Reisman lost his case in the First Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this month, but Alt said his institute intends to file a petition in early January asking the Supreme Court to hear it.
Over time, Reisman grew frustrated by the local union's association with two larger labor organizations whose political speech he didn't embrace: the Maine Education Association and the National Education Association.
While Reisman says in a profile on the Buckeye Institute's website that he was happy the Supreme Court ruled in Janus he would not have to fund union activities, he argues that is not enough. Maine has a law requiring any workplace in which 50 percent of the employees vote to be represented by a union to allow that group “exclusive representation” of all employees in that bargaining unit. This means Reisman cannot negotiate the terms of his employment for himself – the union speaks for him.
More at: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/challenge-to-union-power-janus
