As with many employment and labor law related cases (and bills) that are being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out. This is one to keep an eye on.
Facts: Illinois' Public Labor Relations Act
authorizes exclusive representatives to enter into agency fee agreements
with the State of Illinois that require employees, as a condition of
their employment, to "pay their proportionate share of the costs of the
collective bargaining process, contract administration, and pursuing
matters affecting wages, hours and other conditions of employment" to
that particular union.
The State of Illinois is party to agency fee agreements with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees ("AFSCME") and
the General Teamsters/Professional & Technical Employees Local Union No. 916 ("Teamsters"), such that employees represented by these unions are
forced to pay compulsory agency fees. As a result, Mark Janus ("Janus") works for the Illinois Department of Health and Family Services and is forced to send part of his paycheck to AFSCME for agency fees. In addition, Brian Trygg ("Trygg") works for the Illinois Department of Transportation and is forced to send part of his paycheck to the Teamsters for agency fees.
The District Court dismissed the claims, in part on grounds that Abood v. Detroit Board of Education found these agency fees to be constitutional. A three judge panel from the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal.
Issue: Can public sector unions force non-members to pay agency fees to union officials, by way of deductions from an employee's paycheck, in order to keep their jobs?
Current Status: This past March, the Seventh Circuit upheld forced union dues and fees based upon the Supreme Court's 1977 case, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education. Last week, attorneys for the plaintiff filed a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court and asked that the Court consider hearing this case during the 2017 - 2018 term.
Looking Ahead: Readers might recall that the Supreme Court deadlocked with a 4 - 4 decision on a similar issue last year in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. At the time, the Supreme Court only had eight Justices on the bench after Justice Scalia's death and the lack of a new Judge having been appointed when Friedrichs was heard. It is widely expected the Court will agree to hear Janus, now that the Court has nine Justices. Should the Court agree to hear the case and given that we are still rather far out from oral hearings (let alone the Court issuing its decision), it would not surprise me if the Court ultimately decides in favor of Janus and Trygg and holds that public sector unions cannot charge agency fees to non-members. With the recent appointment of Justice Neil Gorsuch by President Donald Trump, many observers (myself included) expect some of these labor cases such as Janus to be decided against labor unions.
Comments
Post a Comment