Senator Sykes Disappointed by U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on Public Sector Unions
June 27, 2018
Vernon Sykes News
Today, state Senator Vernon Sykes (D-Akron) expressed his disappointment and frustration with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on the Janus v AFSCME, Council 31 case.
“Today’s Supreme Court decision will undoubtedly make it harder for unions to negotiate fair wages and workplace safety,” said Senator Sykes. “It’s simple; the American middle class is strongest when workers have the power to raise employment standards, and the Janus ruling weakens their ability to do just that. After the resounding defeat of Senate Bill 5, we know Ohioans overwhelmingly reject these attacks on workers.”
The Janus ruling found unconstitutional public sector unions’ collection of “fair share” dues from non-union employees. Unions use fair share dues to pay expenses when negotiating and enforcing contracts on behalf of all employees – both union and non-union.
This creates a “free loader” problem as non-union employees will receive union benefits without paying union fees. Without fair share dues, union leaders have expressed concern that reduced revenue will affect their ability to effectively advocate on behalf of all workers.
Mark Janus, the plaintiff of the case, sued the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 31 claiming it used his fair share dues to pay for political activities and infringed on his First Amendment right to free speech and free association.
Workers’ rights advocates claimed the Janus argument was already settled, as the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Abood v Detroit Board of Education (1977) that it is illegal for unions to use these fees to pay for political activities. However, the Janus ruling has effectively overturned the 40-year precedent of Abood.
“Today’s Supreme Court decision will undoubtedly make it harder for unions to negotiate fair wages and workplace safety,” said Senator Sykes. “It’s simple; the American middle class is strongest when workers have the power to raise employment standards, and the Janus ruling weakens their ability to do just that. After the resounding defeat of Senate Bill 5, we know Ohioans overwhelmingly reject these attacks on workers.”
The Janus ruling found unconstitutional public sector unions’ collection of “fair share” dues from non-union employees. Unions use fair share dues to pay expenses when negotiating and enforcing contracts on behalf of all employees – both union and non-union.
This creates a “free loader” problem as non-union employees will receive union benefits without paying union fees. Without fair share dues, union leaders have expressed concern that reduced revenue will affect their ability to effectively advocate on behalf of all workers.
Mark Janus, the plaintiff of the case, sued the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 31 claiming it used his fair share dues to pay for political activities and infringed on his First Amendment right to free speech and free association.
Workers’ rights advocates claimed the Janus argument was already settled, as the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Abood v Detroit Board of Education (1977) that it is illegal for unions to use these fees to pay for political activities. However, the Janus ruling has effectively overturned the 40-year precedent of Abood.