At issue in the case are the laws in 22 States, which allow public unions to require that public employees who are not union members to pay so-called “agency” or “fair share” fees. The idea is that even public employees who are not members benefit from the collective bargaining of that union, and therefore should pay for the union’s representation. Without the ability of unions to charge these agency fees, unions would be spending a great deal of time and money negotiating contracts that benefit both members of unions and non-union members. This creates the problem of non Union "free riders" — workers who benefit from the union’s collective bargaining efforts but don't pay for them.
The Supreme Court blessed this arrangement in a 1977 case called Abood v Detroit Board of Education in which the court found that public employees could be forced to pay for expenses associated with collective bargaining and other related activities, but not for political activities. Despite the court’s ruling in Abood, Mark Janus, a public employee who is not a member of a public union, claims that the state law allowing unions to require him to pay agency fees violates his First Amendment rights. Janus specifically argues that by forcing him to pay for union activity with which he disagrees, he is being compelled to speak for and associate with the union.
A large percentage of Union dollars is spent on lobbying efforts and political donations which the members may not necessarily agree with.
Janus appears to overturn the premise in Abood and now Public Employee Union members can drop out of paying Union dues.
Many Police Officers are concerned about the potential legal counsel they would lose by dropping out of a Union, but apparently fraternal organizations such as the Fraternal Order of Police "FOP" offer legal "buy in" programs for their members that in many cases are more effective than the Union representation at a much lower membership cost than the forced Union dues.
A Hartford Police Officer dropped out of the Union today and apparently he is not the first. Only time will tell if this will be a trend for government employees not happy with their Union representation.
SCN_0014 by on Scribd
Unions benefit the organization as well as the union members. With unions, the employers have a single bargaining representative. Without unions, employers can give the non-union members whatever raises and benefits they feel appropriate.
ReplyDeleteNon-union members may not be contractually eligible for extra duty and their benefits can be adjusted. While I support Janus in theory, in practice it will be difficult to implement.