* Press release…
Gov. Bruce Rauner today hailed the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Janus v. AFSCME as a major victory for public sector workers’ First Amendment rights to free speech and association and a victory for taxpayers who must bear the high cost of government.
The Governor said that the decision will help combat the conflicts of interest created when government union leaders negotiate with politicians they help elect.
“For decades, Illinois workers have been forced to pay partial union dues against their will,” Rauner said. “The practice infringed on the constitutional rights of public sector workers who were asked to give up their First Amendment rights as a condition of employment. This decision fairly reinstates those rights.”
In 2015, shortly after taking office, Gov. Rauner issued an Executive Order to protect workers’ freedom of speech and initiated the lawsuit against AFSCME arguing compulsory fees for non-union government workers were unconstitutional. The suit was later taken up by Illinois child support specialist Mark Janus and the Liberty Justice Center and resulted in today’s SCOTUS decision.
Prior to today’s ruling, paying union fees was compulsory whether a government worker was a union member or not, and whether a worker agreed with the union’s political agenda or not. The fees average more than 80% of full union dues. The high court’s decision means state workers can no longer be forced to pay union fees if they choose not to be a member of the union.
Rauner said that the State of Illinois will stop withholding ‘fair share’ fees from non-union member paychecks. He also said that Illinois state workers will be notified of the Janus ruling today and be given an opportunity to modify their union status. The average state employee union member in Illinois pays more than $900 a year in fees.
“This ruling is pro-worker and pro-taxpayer,” Rauner said. “State employees – union and non-union – do tremendous work for the people of Illinois. This ruling is a great victory for our democracy, our public employees, and the taxpayers who count on us to bargain on their behalf.”
The significance of the court’s decision will be felt not just in Illinois, but across America. It is estimated that there are 5 million public employee union members in 22 states who could be affected by today’s ruling.
“I am proud of what we started three years ago on behalf of state employees and taxpayers,” Rauner concluded. “We are grateful to Mark Janus and the Liberty Justice Center for joining with me to bring this important issue to its rightful conclusion.”
* Illinois News Network…
By taking a portion of his paycheck against his will, Janus successfully argued he was being forced to associate with a union whose policies he doesn’t support.
“I’m thrilled that the Supreme Court has restored not only my First Amendment rights, but the rights of millions of other government workers across the country,” Janus said. “So many of us have been forced to pay for political speech and policy positions with which we disagree, just so we can keep our jobs. This is a victory for all of us. The right to say ‘no’ to a union is just as important as the right to say ‘yes.’ Finally our rights have been restored.”
*** UPDATE *** Video of the governor’s press conference…
- Mike Cirrincione - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:45 am:
Mark Janus….Free at last!
Please tell us how you’ve endured under this terrible guv’mint opression…
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:45 am:
Up yours. Union Up Rauner
- Lester Holt’s Mustache - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:48 am:
Running for re-elect in a blue state, one where a majority of voters still support union membership, is this victory dance (and sure to come victory laps when he gets back from DC) really a bright idea?
Or maybe he doesn’t care now that he’s accomplished his mission? If that’s the case, it makes his comments on Champaign yesterday more logical.
- Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:50 am:
“I am proud of what we started three years ago on behalf of state employees and taxpayers”
State workers and others by and large know what a phony Bruce Rauner is. The choice is clear: pay union dues under $1,000 per year or lose $3,000 or more per year through cuts, as well as key worker protections like layoff rights and protection from damaging privatization. The prospect would open up for further cuts as workers ride the slippery slope down to Rauner’s vision of no unions.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:53 am:
yeah, yeah, yeah, Bruce Rauner, First Amendment warrior. That was his motivation.
The only times the guy ever says what he really thinks — half of Chicago teachers are “virtually illiterate,” Champaign “not much of a workforce,” he gets in trouble.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:53 am:
===“I am proud of what we started three years ago on behalf of state employees and taxpayers,” Rauner concluded. “We are grateful to Mark Janus and the Liberty Justice Center for joining with me to bring this important issue to its rightful conclusion.”===
“joining with me”
The mythology… on the steps of the Supreme Court… Rauner even wore a tie…
Rauner… wore a tie…
Diana got HB40 to save face, Bruce is creating a mythology to shape a legacy outside being a failed governor, destroying Illinois purposely.
It’s so warped… but all this is happening… and happened… for $112 million dollars.
Bruce Rauner will now be forgotten for his destruction, the social services closed, the Quincy Veterans Home, the starving of higher education, no budget…
… the Rauner mythology, the invitations to speak, the tee-vee appearance, the think tank invitations… the history books… and the written history is solidifying this mythology.
Now, Diana, you know, “the Democrat”… business decisions outside her alleged Democratic beliefs… the sham is… Diana Rauner needed HB40 signed clean… even if it meant Bruce lied to Cardinal Cupich… Diana needed it for today… to save face… as a Democrat… she will point to HB40… as Raunerism is nether a Democratic or Republican thing… but saving face is a Bruce and Diana thing.
Read above.
Think.
Bruce is forcing the whitewashing of three years of failure… of Raunerism… for a mythology to have a legacy built on wet sand.
Read above with these past 3 years in mind… and the Raunerites that enabled in the General Assembly… not as sweet?… bittersweet?… tasty?… what price did our state pay for a legacy built on a mythology?
Read.
Read for comprehension, not for the hoped interpretation.
- Honeybear - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:55 am:
Thank you Mark Janus
You just made my support of a union
A matter of Free speech.
If it’s speech to not pay
It’s speech to pay
Chew on that unintended consequence
The “reliance” from this case
As Ginsburg noted
Is going to be Savage
- Nick Name - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:56 am:
If anyone thinks for one second that Rauner did this on behalf of state workers - or even taxpayers, for that matter - I have a bridge to sell you.
- Thoughts Matter - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 11:00 am:
Janus is still being ‘forced to’ associated with the union. They are still representing him in all non political ways a union represents their members. They just can’t force him to pay for services rendered. He still has to abide by the contract and only gets the benefits and pay negotiated by the union. Clueless.
- dbk - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 11:15 am:
@word –The only times the guy ever says what he really thinks — half of Chicago teachers are “virtually illiterate,” Champaign “not much of a workforce,” he gets in trouble.–
Right. And it would be advisable to ensure he gets in trouble every day, in every way, henceforth.
What a legacy Rauner leaves, not just to the state of Illinois, but to the nation: anti-union, anti-worker, anti-middle class, anti-minorities/POC (remember: minority women have been enabled to enter the middle class via public service union jobs). He’s fulfilled his mission.
I want to hear him say how he’s done more for minorities than any governor in history in that first debate, I really do.
This decision will usher in a period of labor unrest, the nature of which we can only begin to imagine, on a national and eventually, international scale.
- Raccoon Mario - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 11:18 am:
So if collective bargaining is now considered free speech, will laws that restrict this form of free speech, like Wisconsin’s Act 10, have to be repealed?
- Honeybear - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 11:25 am:
Raccoon Mario, yes that is the “reliance” that Ginsburg mentioned
Act 10 will come down
- I'm an Illinois fool - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 11:42 am:
All this time I was thinking that taxpayers and public employees was one in the same. Can’t wait to leave this State.
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 11:51 am:
“Act 10 will come down” Seems to me that also shoots down one of the TA’s other big targets, what can be bargained over. If you pass a law that says I can’t bargain over health insurance, you’re restricting my Free Speech.
- Sunshyne - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 12:22 pm:
So AFSCME needs to start a third category of people who don’t want to be in the union and don’t want to pay fair share to vie for themselves when they negotiate for raises etc.
- Anon - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 12:35 pm:
I am a card carrying member of Teamsters 916 because of the governor and his abusive treatment of the state employees. This SCOTUS decision does not change my mind.
- Sarcastic One - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 12:37 pm:
I’ll bet Rauner immediately stops withholding fair share but continues to stall court orders to reimplement step increases. LOL
- Curmudgeon - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 12:54 pm:
” … Rauner said that the State of Illinois will stop withholding ‘fair share’ fees from non-union member paychecks. …”
I rather expected he’d try this. I would not have been surprised if he also decided to not collect Fair Share payments from anyone until they affirmatively declare their willingness to continue contributing. However, I question whether he can do either just on his own. First, the ILSC has already ruled that the provisions of the old contract still applied with regards to step increases. Wouldn’t the same principle apply to this?
Second, isn’t it likely the State Comptroller might have something to say about whether this can be discontinued?
Can anyone state authoritatively how the payroll deduction for Fair Share fees and forwarding the collection to AFSCME or other unions began? Is it a matter of State law or just previous governors’ executive decisions?
- Motambe - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 1:10 pm:
Oswego Willy is dead on. Rauner’s only legacy of accomplishment will be HB 40.
- RNUG - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 1:28 pm:
Unintended consequences Rauner and the 1.4% may come to regret.
If union dues are truly free speech, then every law restricting union spending on political issues just got tossed out the window. In some ways, this decision will be the Union’s version of Citizens United.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 1:50 pm:
Curious that Rauner just tweeted a photo of himself jawboning with George Will.
Perhaps Will is explaining to him the importance of voting against Republicans in November.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/vote-against-the-gop-this-november/2018/06/22/a6378306-7575-11e8-b4b7-308400242c2e_story.html?utm_term=.0201ceb85378
- Dave Dahl - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:49 pm:
Maybe the guv is unaware George Will is from Champaign.
- Nick Name - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:00 pm:
===Unintended consequences Rauner and the 1.4% may come to regret.
If union dues are truly free speech, then every law restricting union spending on political issues just got tossed out the window. In some ways, this decision will be the Union’s version of Citizens United.===
Yup. Also, if collective bargaining is free speck then stand by for lawsuits to overturn all of Scott Walker’s anti-union legislation in Wisconsin. The people behind Janus have no idea what they’re in for.
- Rabid - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 9:58 pm:
Mark has his first amendment, they didn’t take the unions away
- Rabid - Thursday, Jun 28, 18 @ 6:33 am:
Turnaround agenda number 47, the first amendment to lower cost
- Rob - Thursday, Jun 28, 18 @ 12:00 pm:
The union now can focus on actually speaking for members and no longer worrying about the others who don’t like their speech. It be even better if the union could get out of collective bargaining for the whole unit and leave that to someone else since the union doesn’t actually represent everyone in the bargaining unit.