* Background is here…
Dear xxxx,
Today you may have received a memo via the state email system from the Rauner Administration purporting to interpret the recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Janus v AFSCME Council 31.
As you know all too well, this case actually originated with Bruce Rauner and he was on the steps of the US Supreme Court today to claim credit for the outcome.
The misleading memo sent out by Rauner aide Tim McDevitt is actually an attempt to further the agenda Bruce Rauner has had since Day One, to weaken unions in state government, especially AFSCME. For more than three years our union has refused to bow down to Rauner’s demands to freeze steps, double health insurance costs, and weaken rights on the job.
In other words, Rauner failed to break our union, just as he has failed at managing our state. So it’s no wonder that his administration has now set up a special website to try to push employees to abandon their union.
Here are the facts:
* You do NOT need to use the anti-union website that the Rauner Administration has set up.
* If you are a fair share feepayer, CMS will stop deduction of fees from your paycheck. You do not need to sign anything or take any further action. But if you agree that everyone who benefits from union representation should contribute toward the cost of that representation, then you should sign up as a member right away by contacting your local union.
* If you are already a union member, you do NOT need to go to the new CMS website and sign up again. By signing a union membership card—whether that was last month or twenty years ago—you have “opted in” to being a union member. CMS provides the union with a list of all members every month based on the submission of those cards.
* If you want to drop out of the union—and certainly we hope you won’t!—you can call AFSCME Council 31 at 312-641-6060.
Today’s message from the Rauner Administration is part and parcel of Bruce Rauner’s longstanding effort to divide and, yes, conquer state employees. Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen. If you’re already a full dues-paying member, great! You don’t have to do anything else today. If you’re a feepayer, take the time right now to contact your local union and sign a union membership card.
In Unity,
Tracey Abman
Associate Director
P.S. Unlike Bruce Rauner, AFSCME is not permitted to use the state email system to discuss the meaning of the Janus case. So please share this message via personal email (or hard copy print out) with your co-workers.
52 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
Quick hits
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I’m guessing you won’t find a weapon like this in legal marijuana shops in Colorado, California, etc…
* And then there’s the state and local revenues…
20 Comments
|
* DGA…
One day after WCIA reported that Governor Bruce Rauner “appeared to blame the people of Champaign-Urbana for big technology companies leaving the state,” Rauner sort of apologized to community leaders for his remarks following a fierce backlash. But, unable to take full responsibility for anything, Rauner also claimed that “my statements got taken out of context.”
Really? Here’s Rauner talking about tech jobs leaving Illinois last week:
“There’s several reasons, but part of the reason is, Champaign-Urbana is wonderful, but it’s very hard to keep a company of more than six people there. There’s no convenient transportation, not much of a workforce. It’s very hard.
Rauner’s comment drew instant and overwhelming rebuke from community and economic leaders, including one Republican state Senator who called for Rauner to apologize. Well, he got half of one.
“Amazing. Bruce Rauner cannot even apologize for badmouthing our state and workers without trying to dodge responsibility,” said DGA Illinois Communications Director Sam Salustro. “Rauner got caught dissing Champaign-Urbana just like he bashes Illinois in what is just a desperate attempt to distract from his three years of failed leadership.”
* He didn’t just falsely claim his remarks were taken out of context…
* News-Gazette…
“Governor Rauner apologized for and clarified his recent remarks about the disadvantages small communities face in competing with large, urban centers. And the governor clarified his firm belief that Champaign-Urbana is doing an outstanding job in economic development by utilizing and promoting its many attributes,” campaign spokesman Will Allison said in an email Tuesday night.
So… all of Downstate gets dissed now? That’s how he gets out of it?
…Adding… This isn’t an isolated incident. Remember the trouble he got himself into about the Rivian plant in Bloomington-Normal and how he tried to blame his enemies for stirring it all up?
21 Comments
|
*** UPDATED x1 *** It’s just a bill
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Press release…
Illinois House Republican Leader Jim Durkin (R-Western Springs) introduced new legislation today that will sunset Illinois’ property tax code to force the General Assembly to reform the broken system.
House Bill 5924 creates a deadline of July 1, 2019 for the General Assembly to create a new property tax code that is fair and equitable throughout the entire state of Illinois. If the General Assembly fails to address this by the deadline, the current Illinois property tax code will be immediately removed from state law.
“It is plain and simple: the property tax system in Illinois is a failure, and it is time to start over,” Durkin said. “By setting a firm deadline for the General Assembly, it will force the legislature to come together in a bipartisan manner to find a compromise solution that will remedy this crisis and help bring Illinois back.”
A recent report from Attom Data Solutions shows Illinois with the second highest property taxes in the nation. Additionally, a Smart Asset report shows the statewide average effective tax rate in Illinois is 2.32 percent, almost double than the national average. A Chicago Tribune investigation earlier this year showed that the property tax system is so unfair in Cook County that taxpayers pay more if their house is worth less depending on where they live, unfairly targeting minority communities.
“We have seen both parties come together to work on accomplishing two very important issues this last year: a new education funding reform formula and a balanced budget with no new taxes,” Durkin said. “Now that bipartisanship in Illinois has a chance at working again, we must come together diligently and find a solution to this problem that is bankrupting Illinois taxpayers, crushing home values and stifling job growth throughout the state.”
Watch Leader Durkin’s full remarks on the new legislation at the City Club of Chicago earlier today by clicking here.
*** UPDATE *** Rep. Sam Yingling…
Today, dozens of local property tax payers showed up at the Lake County Board Financial and Administrative Committee Meeting to support SB2544, a bill that increases fairness and accountability in the office of the Lake County Assessor. The bill passed both chambers of the Illinois General Assembly with bi-partisan super-majorities in May.
Members of the Lake County Board ignored the taxpayers who support SB2544 and chose, instead, to pass a resolution opposing the bill that included baseless accusations and turned this taxpayer initiative into a political circus by recommending that the governor issue an amendatory veto on the bill. An amendatory veto by the governor would be nothing more than a back-door stall tactic that would deny taxpayers the right to vote in November.
“It’s disappointing but not surprising that some members of the Lake County Board are attempting to thwart the grassroots campaign to bring accountability to the office of the Lake County Assessor,” said Yingling. “I’m proud to be part of a grassroots campaign that is activating taxpayers across Lake County. When I’ve gone door to door in my district, constituents have been clear: the status quo is not working, and they want the governor to sign SB2544.”
A strong grassroots campaign has been built to support SB2544. Yingling has been airing TV ads in Lake County that have been reaching thousands of taxpayers at home every day. The campaign’s digital ad has been viewed close to 20,000 times on social media. Thousands of Lake County taxpayers have made phone calls to the governor to urge him to sign the bill. Hundreds more have called Lake County Board Chairman Aaron Lawlor to urge him to stop playing games and support the measure. In addition, the campaign is on track to collect over 1,000 signatures to deliver to the governor.
“I am hopeful that Governor Rauner will sign SB2544 instead of interfering with the will of the people as the Lake County Board has chosen to do,” concluded Yingling. “Anything short of a signed bill from the governor will deny the taxpayers of Lake County their right to vote this November to make the property tax system accountable to them.”
The measure puts the question on the ballot in November to let the people decide whether the position of Lake County Chief County Assessment Office, the Lake County Assessor, should be popularly elected by the people.
* Other bills and stuff…
* Illinois consumers may be in the dark about the future cost of electricity: Consumer advocate Illinois PIRG, a non-profit public interest research group, and energy firm GlidePath Development LLC filed suit Monday in Cook County Circuit Court saying the Illinois Commerce Commission repeatedly has violated the Illinois Open Meetings Act since launching its “NextGrid” project to identify, research and recommend options for improving Illinois’ electricity generation and delivery.
* Sun-Times Editorial: Sign the nine bills, Governor, and make Illinois safer and fairer
* Southern Illinois county to ask voters on gun ‘sanctuary’ issue: Williamson County Board of Commissioners Chairman Jim Marlo told The Southern Illinoisan that the board has voted to let residents have input on the resolution to become a sanctuary county for gun owners, a reference to so-called sanctuary cities that don’t cooperate with aspects of federal immigration enforcement.
* Illinois racetracks seek OK to take wagers on ‘historical horse racing’: The Illinois Racing Board advanced a proposal Tuesday to allow video gambling on past horse races — even as the board’s attorney advised that the move would be illegal.
7 Comments
|
Question of the day
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Rep. Ives…
* Anzalone Liszt Grove Research poll commissioned by AFSCME Council 31 and released in July of 2016…
Voters are favorable towards “public employee unions” (51% favorable / 29% unfavorable) and “state government workers” (57% favorable / 28% unfavorable).
* Capitol Fax/We Ask America poll conducted June 9-11, 2018. Gubernatorial head-to-heads among likely union household voters…
Republican Bruce Rauner 17%
Democrat JB Pritzker 50%
Third party or some other 24%
Undecided or don’t know 10%
* From the same poll, only this time here are the results from likely Republican voters…
Republican Bruce Rauner 59%
Democrat JB Pritzker 5%
Third party or some other 27%
Undecided or don’t know 9%
* OK, with that background out of the way, JB Pritzker held a press conference today and, among other things, he was asked these two questions…
SJ-R’s Bernie Schoenburg: Politically speaking, this is going to give many conservatives who do not like Bruce Rauner a reason to say ‘Hey, he’s OK.’ Whereas AFSCME and a lot of unions already have decided by his rhetoric ‘He’s not OK.” So, doesn’t this help him more than you politically in this election?
AP’s John O’Connor: Conservatives who went for Jeanne Ives, as Bernie says, this draws them… Your backers don’t change their minds, but a lot of conservatives out there are going to say ‘Bruce Rauner’s OK and we’re going to get behind him.’
He didn’t really answer either question (candidates almost never answer horse-race questions), but that’s not the point of this post.
* This is what I told subscribers earlier today…
Gov. Rauner is already celebrating the win, but I can’t help but wonder if this really will help him in November. I don’t think most voters will truly care either way, but a significant segment of the population will be very angry about this loss and, therefore, very motivated to vote against the man who brought the action in the first place. We’ll see.
I do agree that this Janus decision should help Rauner unify his base. But you can’t win in Illinois with only your base, especially if you’re a Republican. And, according to my poll, Pritzker also has some convincing to do with union households.
* The Question: Who is helped more politically by the Janus decision - Pritzker or Rauner? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
survey hosting
49 Comments
|
* In the order they were received. From Democratic congressional candidate Brendan Kelly regarding today’s Janus decision…
“Today’s decision is a direct and devastating blow to our union brothers and sisters in Southern Illinois. It is not just disappointing — it is a terrible assault on the people and institutions who have fought, built, and maintained the American middle class,” said Brendan Kelly, candidate for Illinois’s 12th Congressional district. “Wages are still too low, inequality is rising, and our workers and unions are bruised and battered from decades of sustained onslaught against their rights from the likes of Bruce Rauner and his ally in DC, Mike Bost. This again proves it’s not enough to be on the side of right–we have to fight! This latest attempt to crush the American worker has awoken the sleeping giant of organized labor, and only strengthened our resolve.”
* From the Republican incumbent Kelly is challenging, US Rep. Mike Bost…
“As a former union firefighter and the grandson of a United Mine Workers representative, labor is in my blood,” said Bost. “Unions have played an instrumental role in strengthening the hand of America’s working men and women for generations. It is only right that workers who receive higher pay, benefits, and workplace protections contribute their fair share of the costs. While this position may not always be popular in my party, for me it’s one that rises above politics.”
Bost is the only Republican to send me a statement so far today with that stance.
9 Comments
|
CMS reaches out to state employees about Janus
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Tim McDevitt, the Acting Director of Central Management Services…
All Employees,
The United States Supreme Court ruled today that State employees are no longer required to pay “fair share” fees if they choose not to be a member of the union. The Court found the practice to be a violation of First Amendment free speech rights.
As a result, effective immediately, the State will stop deducting “fair share” fees from the paychecks of State employees who are not union members. “Fair share” fees currently average approximately $737 and full member dues currently average approximately $911 per year.
The Supreme Court also held that to be a member of a union, an employee must opt-in and elect to have dues withheld.
Under the law, a bargaining unit employee can opt-in or opt-out of a union at any time. Employees can visit the TEAM ILLINOIS link to notify CMS of their choices and find out what the dues deduction is for their particular bargaining unit. Employees who do not have a State email account can notify their agency’s HR representative of any change in union status.
The Supreme Court’s decision does not alleviate unions of their obligations to fairly represent all bargaining unit employees in collective bargaining, whether they are members of the union or not. An employee’s decision to join or withdraw from the union will not impact his or her job protections with the State.
You will NOT lose your employment benefits if you opt-out of the union. A recent ASFCME circular saying so was incorrect. In fact, Illinois statute requires the State to provide healthcare benefits, retirement benefits and many other employment benefits. They do not depend on union membership or collective bargaining. In addition, even if you opt-out of the union, you still receive the same employment benefits as union members.
If you have any questions, you can send them to Union.Dues@illinois.gov.
Sincerely,
Tim McDevitt, CMS
68 Comments
|
* From September of last year…
Gov. Bruce Rauner suffered new fallout Friday from his shocking decision to sign a controversial abortion bill — scratched as the featured speaker at a suburban Republican picnic to avoid creating a “distraction.”
The backlash even hit a personal note from one of Rauner’s closest political allies, John Tillman, the CEO of the conservative Illinois Policy Institute.
The think tank leader labeled the governor “Benedict Rauner” for disregarding his previous claims that he wouldn’t sign the controversial House Bill 40, which expands public funding of abortion and protects it in case the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe V. Wade.
“Benedict Rauner going back on his word and signing HB40,” Tillman wrote in a Facebook post Friday morning. “Whether you are pro life or pro choice, a politician loses when he gives his word to many people and goes back on it, including to Cardinal [Blase] Cupich.
“Further, if you care only about economic issues, he has put that entire agenda at risk by betraying those to whom he gave his word. My personal views here only, of course,” Tillman wrote.
* Then, back in February, Gov. Rauner was asked to react to a Sun-Times/Pro Publica investigation into the Illinois Policy Institute and its top dog John Tillman…
Well, I can tell you I would absolutely not give them another nickel, I can say that. I’ve been a longtime funder of efforts to bring free market principles to Illinois and to America. They used to be an advocate there. But I’m very troubled, very troubled by what I’ve learned. And I certainly would not give them any more money.
* The governor’s comment provoked a sharp response…
Tillman fired back almost instantly, posting on Twitter that he was “assuming that’s because Diana won’t allow him to donate to us” — a reference to Illinois’ first lady, who is a professed Democrat but has donated to both Democratic and Republican causes.
“Regardless, we wouldn’t accept his donation,” Tillman continued. “Our members believe in balanced budgets, responsible gov’t and reducing taxes on Illinois’ middle class — all of which @GovRauner has failed to achieve since taking office.”
* Also in February, the Liberty Justice Center, which is closely affiliated with Tillman’s Illinois Policy Institute, sent Rauner what looked like a cease and desist letter about the Janus case…
As you know, the Liberty Justice Center is representing an Illinois state worker in the Supreme Court case Janus v. AFSCME. I am writing to request that you immediately stop misrepresenting the case and your role in it in public appearances and in the media. […]
The plaintiff in this case has been represented throughout the litigation by my organization, the Liberty Justice Center, and our partners at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. The federal district court dismissed you from the case in 2015, and since then you have played no role in it.
Ironically, there was an official role for you to play in the lawsuit. Elected officials from Michigan, Alabama, Indiana, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada and other states all submitted amicus briefs in support of the lawsuit. You could have filed an amicus brief or joined theirs, but you did not.
* Today, however, Tillman was singing a different tune…
Workers’ rights were restored today because of two people: Mark Janus and Bruce Rauner.
First, I’d like to thank Gov. Bruce Rauner for having the vision, the leadership and the courage to initiate this case in 2015. He took tremendous risk and criticism for advancing the simple idea that workers should be free to define their relationship with a government union.
* And the two appeared together at a DC press conference. Radical Candor gets the last word…
16 Comments
|
Hedging his Madigan bets?
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Gov. Rauner on FOX Business’ “Varney & Co” on Monday…
I’m committed to picking up nine seats in the General Assembly this election cycle. And if we do that, our corrupt political boss Michael Madigan, who’s been in the Legislature since 1971, we get him gone and we’ll make big changes.
* Gov. Rauner on Roe Conn’s show on Friday…
Roe Conn: If Mike Madigan is still gonna be there after this election, which I guess he is.
Gov. Rauner: Probably. Yep.
Roe: And still Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate. They may be smaller but they still may be majorities.
Gov. Rauner: That’s right. Uh-huh.
* More from that interview via the Tribune…
While Rauner has spent millions of dollars to sully Madigan, he said it didn’t mean the veteran House speaker had to be defeated.
“We need to shrink the bureaucracy. We have too many layers of bureaucracy, and we can get that done,” Rauner said.
“Frankly we don’t need Speaker Madigan to be gone,” the governor said. “What we do need, though, is a few more legislators who are reform minded, who want to change the system and know that it’s not working. Republicans as well as Democrats. This is not really a partisan election or a partisan issue. It’s a good government issue. It’s about the people against a broken system,” he said.
14 Comments
|
* Architects Newspaper…
In 2004, Chicago watched historic Soldier Field become a toilet bowl. In 2019, Union Station will become a self-inked address stamper. During a public meeting on June 25, Chicago-based architects Solomon Cordwell Buenz (SCB) unveiled plans to construct a seven-story glass addition to the 1925 Graham, Anderson, Probst & White train station in the West Loop. Along with Riverside Investment & Development and Convexity Properties, SCB outlined the details of the proposal, including a hotel, apartments, an office complex, and retail. If implemented, Union Station would rise in height from 150 to 245 feet, with the proposed glass rectangle atop the existing office tour delivering 404 apartments. The multi-story main building, or headhouse, would become 330 hotel rooms.
* Edward Keegan in Crain’s…
The SCB scheme looks like a banal government-issue office building of the 1960s has been plunked down on top of the original. […]
The fact that this design has been publicly unveiled is an insult to Chicago’s alleged position as a place that takes architecture seriously. It requires a complete do-over.
* To my eyes, it looks like a very familiar “banal government-issue office building” of the 1950s. Here’s the proposed Union Station addition…
* And here’s the Stratton Building, which was completed in 1956…
Yuck.
29 Comments
|
Unclear on most of the concepts
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Umm…
1) Fair share payers and all union members have always been free, as citizens, to support and vote for whomever they want for any political office.
2) Fair share fee money could not, by very definition, be spent on campaigns.
But, yeah, he’s right that this is a big loss for the Dems. To some, that’s what this has been all about since the beginning.
49 Comments
|
Two ways of looking at it
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* AP…
The former chief of staff to Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan who resigned amid sexual harassment allegations will collect $130,500 for unused vacation and sick time, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.
A 40-year state employee, Timothy Mapes will be reimbursed for 91 vacation days and will get half-pay for 146 sick days for a payout of $130,516.28, according to records disclosed under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act.
Forced to step down June 6 from his $208,000-a-year job, Mapes has been House clerk as well as chief of staff to the powerful Madigan since 1992.
* Two very different reacts…
I don’t personally support allowing workers, particularly highly paid top executives, to “bank” that much sick and vacation time.
Your thoughts?
45 Comments
|
* 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…
26 Comments
|
* Sun-Times yesterday…
Rauner told the Sun-Times, “If we win the [Janus] case, we will notify the state employees of their rights, the outcome of the case. We will inform them of their ability to choose whether to pay the dues or not, and direct them to a website or other information where they can implement their choice.”
Government unions have been bracing for a defeat and expect groups, bankrolled by mega donor anti-union conservatives, running campaigns to persuade government workers to opt-out of unions.
Rauner said the state will not mount a campaign; he expects outside groups will, telling the Sun-Times, “I believe that folks outside of the government both in Illinois and around the country will be working to advocate for an opt out campaign, I believe.
“And I believe that there will be forces including the union and other forces that will be pushing government employees to stay in the union or join the union.”
* Illinois Policy Institute…
In order to assert their First Amendment rights affirmed by the court’s decision, government employees who don’t want to be union members or to pay fees to unions may need to affirmatively opt out of their unions and out of fee deduction arrangements. Generally, that includes 1) written notice to the union opting out of membership, and 2) written notice to the government employer that the worker no longer authorizes dues or fees to be taken from his or her paycheck.
These public employees can do this with no effect on their compensation or other benefits – such as overtime or seniority – provided in their collective bargaining agreements.
Workers who have already opted out of their unions – commonly referred to as fair share payers – may not immediately see a change in their paychecks. To best ensure dues or fees are no longer docked, fair share payers should also give written notice to their government employers.
For more information on how to opt out of a government union, visit leavemyunion.com.
* AFSCME Council 31 sent this out yesterday to local governments with bargaining units…
AFSCME wants to ensure that all public entities that our union has a collective bargaining relationship with are fully aware of the steps that will need to be taken immediately to comply with a Supreme Court decision that declares the fair share fees currently paid by non-members pursuant to State law to be unconstitutional.
The decision will be effective the day it is issued. Therefore, if the ruling prohibits the collection of mandatory fair share fees, employers must immediately cease deducting any fair share fees from the paychecks of employees who are not union members, but fee payers.
Please note that any such ruling in Janus v. AFSCME will only impact the deduction of fair share fees and will not impact the collection of union dues from union members. All public employers can and must continue to deduct union dues from all employees who are union members.
If there is a payroll in progress which includes fair share fee deductions that cannot be changed prior to disbursement, the public entity and AFSCME will need to work together regarding resolution to the collection, as there are several options available and both employers and unions are responsible for compliance with the decision.
AFSCME is prepared to assist employers as needed to make certain all aspects of the Janus v. AFSCME decision are properly implemented in a timely manner. We will work together with you to ensure compliance with any directives of the U.S. Supreme Court and to limit the legal exposures of our respective entities.
In order to facilitate this process, we would appreciate it if you would provide us with an up-to-date list of any employees in AFSCME bargaining units for whom you are currently deducting fair share fees. […]
We ask that the employer refrain from communicating with employees about any Supreme Court ruling in this case. As soon as the Supreme Court rules, AFSCME will be prepared to communicate with all represented employees about the decision. Going forward, we will be prepared to address questions employees may have about the Court’s decision, and request that you refer any such questions to the Union.
We would also note that after the decision is issued, AFSCME and other unions representing your employees will be contacting you to meet to address the impact of the decision.
* From Comptroller Susana Mendoza…
I am profoundly disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision. Union representation is a path to the middle class and ensures fair treatment for workers in Illinois and across the country. It’s not surprising, but it is shameful that Governor Rauner would cheer this attack on working people’s power to organize and advocate for themselves and their communities. His war on organized labor is a war on minorities and women who make up the bulk of union membership.
Though I disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling, I will abide by the courts’ order. Once the lower courts give direction, my office will review the ruling and consult with state agencies to implement it.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Part of Gov. Rauner’s press release…
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.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Illinois Economic Policy Institute…
1. The primary response to Janus by labor unions will be to engage and educate rank-and-file members. Instead of functioning in the background and providing reactive representation for workers in times of need, public sector unions can become more proactive. Many unions will increase their resources devoted to organizing. More unions may include rank-and-file members in contract negotiations, day-to-day administration, and political actions and decisions in efforts to increase worker activism. Moreover, unions may also provide classes to members on U.S. labor history or educate their members on the wage and fringe benefits of being union members. In addition, some unions may provide a tiered benefits package, with members-only benefits– such as discounts at local stores or on premiums for insurance policies– that are not provided to nonmembers. These and similar responses would increase the chances of a high-participation, high-membership public sector union in the wake of the Janus decision that permits free riding in the public sector.
2. In addition to engaging and educating rank-and-file members, labor unions are likely to bring new legal cases in the wake of Janus. For example, with the Supreme Court ruling that collective bargaining in the public sector is inherently political speech protected by the First Amendment, then state and local units of government that forbid collective bargaining infringe on the free speech rights and the freedom of association rights of union members. This could implicate laws such as 2011 Wisconsin Act 10, which may then be deemed unconstitutional. A second response may be to bring lawsuits against state and local governments which invest pension funds– which are contractually owed to workers– in corporations that contribute to political activities with which public sector workers disagree. Similarly, taxpayers may now be granted First Amendment rights to demand that their taxpayer dollars are not used for lobbying or political advocacy, such as by local governments to hire lobbyists to petition for policies with which taxpayers disagree.
3. The labor movement may also choose to replicate the success of the recent teachers’ strikes in “right-to-work” states like West Virginia, Oklahoma, Arizona, and North Carolina. In February and March of 2018, public school teachers and other school employees in the state’s 55 counties went on strike, refusing to return to work until lawmakers provided a 5 percent raise. This concerted action occurred despite the fact that teachers’ strikes are illegal in West Virginia. Lawmakers approved a 5 percent raise following a two-week demonstration. Then, thousands of Oklahoma teachers walked out, protesting a decade of low and stagnant pay and demanding higher salaries as well as better funding for their schools. The teachers won a $6,000 bump in pay. Then, teachers in Arizona earned a 10 to 20 percent wage increase and additional funding for support staff following a week-long walkout. While these short-lived movements are less effective at securing gains for workers than labor organizations, some public sector workers may have no other recourse than to organize mass demonstrations after Janus.
34 Comments
|
A few highlights from the majority Janus opinion
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the opinion…
JUSTICE ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court.
Under Illinois law, public employees are forced to subsidize a union, even if they choose not to join and strongly object to the positions the union takes in collective bar gaining and related activities. We conclude that this arrangement violates the free speech rights of nonmembers by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern.
We upheld a similar law in Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Ed., 431 U. S. 209 (1977), and we recognize the importance of following precedent unless there are strong reasons for not doing so. But there are very strong reasons in this case. Fundamental free speech rights are at stake. Abood was poorly reasoned. It has led to practical problems and abuse. It is inconsistent with other First Amendment cases and has been undermined by more recent decisions. Developments since Abood was handed down have shed new light on the issue of agency fees, and no reliance interests on the part of public-sector unions are sufficient to justify the perpetuation of the free speech violations that Abood has countenanced for the past 41 years. Abood is therefore overruled. […]
Petitioner [Janus] strenuously objects to this free-rider label. He argues that he is not a free rider on a bus headed for a destination that he wishes to reach but is more like a person shanghaied for an unwanted voyage.
Whichever description fits the majority of public employees who would not subsidize a union if given the option, avoiding free riders is not a compelling interest. As we have noted, “free-rider arguments…are generally insufficient to overcome First Amendment objections.” Knox, 567 U. S., at 311. To hold otherwise across the board would have startling consequences. Many private groups speak out with the objective of obtaining govern ment action that will have the effect of benefiting non members. May all those who are thought to benefit from such efforts be compelled to subsidize this speech? […]
In simple terms, the First Amendment does not permit the government to compel a person to pay for another party’s speech just because the government thinks that the speech furthers the interests of the person who does not want to pay. […]
Even without agency fees, designation as the exclusive representative confers many benefits. As noted, that status gives the union a privileged place in negotiations over wages, benefits, and working conditions. […]
What about the representation of nonmembers in griev ance proceedings? Unions do not undertake this activity solely for the benefit of nonmembers—which is why Illinois law gives a public-sector union the right to send a representative to such proceedings even if the employee declines union representation. §315/6(b). Representation of nonmembers furthers the union’s interest in keeping control of the administration of the collective-bargaining agreement, since the resolution of one employee’s griev ance can affect others. And when a union controls the grievance process, it may, as a practical matter, effectively subordinate “the interests of [an] individual employee . . . to the collective interests of all employees in the bargaining unit.” […]
When an employee engages in speech that is part of the employee’s job duties, the employee’s words are really the words of the employer. The employee is effectively the employer’s spokesperson. But when a union negotiates with the employer or represents employees in disciplinary proceedings, the union speaks for the employees, not the employer. Otherwise, the employer would be negotiating with itself and disputing its own actions. That is not what anybody under stands to be happening. […]
For the reasons given above, we conclude that public- sector agency-shop arrangements violate the First Amendment, and Abood erred in concluding otherwise. There remains the question whether stare decisis nonethe less counsels against overruling Abood. It does not.
51 Comments
|
* NPR…
Government workers have been a relative stronghold in an otherwise shrinking labor movement. More than a third of the public sector workforce is unionized, compared with less than 7 percent in the private sector.
A survey by the AFSCME — the union Janus would have to pay into — found that if agency fees were no longer mandatory, 15 percent of employees would stop paying them while 35 percent would continue to pay. The balance of workers were “on the fence.”
* Also…
Hi Rich:
I just wanted to let you know about our May 2018 study on the Janus decision with Professor Robert Bruno at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Here is an online version of the press release. […]
We find that the ruling could have devastating effects on paychecks and the national economy. Toplines for Illinois specifically are that we expect unionization to fall by 49,000 members, public sector wages to fall by 3.5% on average, and the economy to shrink by $750 million to $2 billion.
Thanks!
Yours,
Frank Manzo IV
Policy Director
Illinois Economic Policy Institute
Midwest Economic Policy Institute
The analysis is here.
*** UPDATE *** Hmm…
72 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
Janus react
Wednesday, Jun 27, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Posted in the order received. International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers…
Today’s Supreme Court decision in Janus v AFSCME was based on a bogus free speech argument. This politically motivated case brought by Mark Janus, paid for by corporate interests, was designed to undercut the bargaining power of those employed in local and state government. This wasn’t about free speech — this was about silencing workers’ voices. The Justices who supported this slap in the face to public employees and their families, reversing settled law, telegraphed that they are little better than political hacks.
In the short run, the Janus decision may hurt some unions financially, but in the long run it will serve to make unions and their members more militant and force a stronger culture of internal organizing. The recent statewide teacher strikes demonstrate that when public sector workers face limitations on their bargaining rights they take their case to the streets.
* Sen. Manar…
State Senator Andy Manar said he is disappointed the U.S. Supreme Court moved today to weaken organized labor and collective bargaining rights for American workers.
“As if the middle class doesn’t have enough problems already, the Supreme Court today chose to put wealthy corporate interests ahead of working people in Illinois and across the country,” said Manar, a Bunker Hill Democrat whose district includes a large number of unionized state employees, as well as many trade union members.
“This case was never about freedom of speech. Its aim from the start was to stifle the voices of teachers, first responders and other frontline workers across the country,” Manar said.
“Make no mistake: the corporations and far-right dark-money organizations behind this case that desperately want more control over government to advance their own interests benefit the most from weakening collective bargaining and diminishing the voice of union labor.”
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the landmark Illinois public employee union case Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 overturns unions’ ability to collect fees from non-members to cover the costs of collective bargaining and enforcement of labor contracts. These fees are known as “fair-share” or “agency fee” payments.
Bruce Rauner filed suit over fair-share fees in 2015 shortly after becoming governor. The Supreme Court’s ruling, which overturns a 1977 decision, has implications for collective bargaining units all over the country.
* Treasurer Frerichs…
“The Supreme Court turned its back on common sense today,” Illinois State Treasurer Michael Frerichs said in response to the court’s 5-4 decision in Janus vs. AFSCME.
“Individuals who receive a service should pay for that service. The court ignored this basic concept to craft a legal argument for the sole purpose of undermining unions in the public sector,” Frerichs said.
“The fair share solution protected the rights of everyone. Workers who did not want to become a member of the union only paid for the services they received; they did not have to pay for political contributions or other union activities unrelated to the narrow scope of representation. The court majority rejected a pragmatic compromise crafted in the 1977 case of Abood v. Detroit Board of Education. Today’s decision is about an extremist, anti-union ideology,” Frerichs said.
This post will be updated.
…Adding… Press release…
Schakowsky Statement on the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME
“This is a sad day for public employees and all of us who rely on them to provide us with the services we need, from keeping our air and water clean to teaching our children to protecting public health. Janus started with Governor Rauner but it was quickly embraced by all those whose mission is to take away the freedoms of working women and men. Janus is about making it more difficult for state and local workers to join together in unions, to bargain collectively for fair wages and benefits, to promote safe workplaces, to blow the whistle on fraud and abuse, and to stand up for the people they serve. It is part of an aggressive, well-funded attack on federal, state and local, and private sector workers.
“Martin Luther King, Jr. knew that collective bargaining was worth fighting for, which is why he stood arm-in-arm with the Memphis sanitation workers during their strike 50 years ago. Today, collective bargaining for public sector workers is more necessary than ever – look no further than the wildcat teacher strikes from West Virginia to Arizona. It’s a shame the Court has chosen to side with billionaires and corporations over teachers, firefighters, social workers, and emergency medical technicians.
“Janus is a terrible decision but it is not the final word. Those of us who know that unions help working families succeed and communities prosper will not just continue the work to promote workplace democracy – we will fight harder than ever.”
* Press release…
he U.S. Supreme Court today issued a 5-4 decision in the Janus v. AFSCME case that was bankrolled by corporate interest groups that wanted to rig the economic system further in their favor and make it even harder for working people to stand united. The Janus decision is not just an attack on public unions, it’s an attack on public education. Seven out of ten teachers are in a union nationwide. This case is a direct attempt to limit the collective voice of educators who advocate for students across the country. Illinois Education Association (IEA) President Kathi Griffin released a video on Facebook to our 135,000 members. The following is a statement from Griffin:
“We are disappointed, but not surprised, by today’s Supreme Court decision that does not allow unions like ours to collect fees from non-members who benefit from the union’s work.
“Let’s be clear, the goal of the people who supported this legal case, including Governor Rauner, is to trying to silence IEA, NEA, local associations and other public employee unions. They want to stop us from using our collective voice to advocate for our students, for ourselves and for public education.
“They will fail.
“It has never been more vital that those of us who believe in fair contracts use our collective voice to make sure that all students have access to a high-quality public education. We will continue to spread the truth about the importance of union membership to all of our brothers and sisters working in schools.
“This fight is just beginning. We won’t let them stop us. We will use their attacks to build a stronger IEA and we will move forward together because we know we are stronger united.”
* More…
Americans for Prosperity-Illinois State Director Andrew Nelms issued the following statement:
“This decision is a huge victory for workers not just in Illinois but across the country. Forcing public workers to fund political activity to keep a job and support their family is a violation of the Constitution. This case vindicates our activists who have long asserted that forcing workers to fund political activity without their consent was a violation of the fundamental and unassailable right to free speech.”
* And…
Following is the statement of Emma Tai, Executive Director of United Working Families (UWF), on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling today on Janus v. AFSCME Council 31.
“Bosses around the country—including the billionaire in Springfield and the con man in Washington DC—are celebrating today’s Supreme Court’s decision. Janus vs. AFSCME Council 31 is a craven attack, underwritten by the wealthiest members of our rigged economy, on the ability of workers to fight for good jobs and robust public services.
“But the ruling by Trump’s Supreme Court should be no surprise. The real question is who will fight back?
“In Chicago and Illinois, union jobs in public schools, hospitals, and transportation were a pathway to the middle class for women and Black and Brown families. While Democrats will use today to defend workers, it was Democrats, not Republicans, who decimated those jobs when they privatized schools, sold parking meters, and closed public clinics. Both Democrats and Republicans refuse to ask their wealthy donors to pay taxes for the flourishing public services we deserve.
“In the aftermath of Janus, the attacks on our jobs, schools, and communities will only deepen. Working people need a real political alternative. That’s what United Working Families is here for.”
* And…
Illinois Federation of Teachers (IFT) President Dan Montgomery released the following statement:
“Though not unexpected, it was incredibly disappointing to see powerful special interests take precedence over the best interests of middle-class Americans at the Supreme Court today.
This case was a direct attack on working people and the causes we fight for every day – protections like health care, safe workplaces, and small class sizes.
This is personal for all teachers, school staff, college faculty and staff, graduate workers, and other hardworking public employees – but even more so here in Illinois, where Governor Bruce Rauner originated this well-funded attack.
Rauner and his powerful friends are focused on eliminating unions because we are one of the last checks on their control and their attempts to rig the economy and democracy further against working people.
And so no court case will divide us or stop our movement. We value our voice. We value our union. And we will keep fighting powerfully for the future we all deserve.”
* And…
Following the Supreme Court decision in Janus v AFSCME curtailing workers’ rights and limiting the ability of public-sector unions to collectively bargain on behalf of their members, U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) released the following statement:
“As income inequality rises and middle-class wages lag behind, we need to do everything we can to make it easier for working Americans to join a union and negotiate for fair wages and a better workplace. Unfortunately, this decision by the Supreme Court will do the opposite, overturning decades of precedent to make it harder for unions to effectively protect and support working people trying to achieve their own American Dream. I’m disappointed that the Court sided with the anti-union activists and well-funded corporations who want to chip away at workers’ rights, but I will continue to stand up to those who want to lower wages, roll back workplace protections and restrict entry into America’s middle class.”
* Also…
In a decision that effectively alters the definition of the word “collective,” the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door for individual employees to no longer pay for the workplace benefits and protections unions collectively bargain on their behalf.
Illinois Senate President John J. Cullerton released a statement expressing his disappointment in the decision.
“The ability to collectively bargain provides economic power and protections that for decades strengthened working families across this country.
I am disappointed that the U.S. Supreme Court sided with anti-union corporate interests who seek to redefine the very meaning of the word ‘collective’ for no reason other than to enrich their own bottom line at the expense of workers.
I remain a believer in the role of organized labor and collective bargaining to make our workplaces and communities strong. Unions were born of challenges and sacrifice. I have faith that they will weather this challenge, too.
But that belief doesn’t change the fact that this is a fundamentally disappointing decision and harbinger of where this anti-worker political agenda will go if we don’t protect the economic rights of working men and women.”
* More…
Greg Kelley, president of SEIU Healthcare Illinois Indiana Missouri & Kansas, released the following statement regarding today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision in Janus v. AFSCME:
“The U.S. Supreme Court ‘s ruling today in favor of the plaintiff in Janus v. AFSCME comes as no surprise. The right-wing court is following lockstep with President Trump, Gov. Rauner, the super wealthy and anti-union groups like the Illinois Policy Institute who want to deprive workers a voice and drive as much profit as possible to the top 1 percent regardless of the impact on everyday Americans who depend on the services public workers provide.
“What the court and these groups don’t realize, however, is that workers will not be deterred by such rulings and will continue to organize and unite to win fair wages and benefits while also providing the care and services that taxpayers want and deserve.
“When these forces came against our members in Harris v. Quinn, we fought back and became even stronger. We’re continuing to win better wages and work conditions in order to deliver better services.
“This attempt to turn back the clock to a time when there were sweatshops, child labor, long hours and no worker benefits will not prevail. As we’ve seen in states like West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky and Arizona, workers want a voice on the job.
“America needs unions today more than ever because organized workers stand in the way of this right-wing corporate agenda.”
* Pritzker…
“I am appalled by today’s Supreme Court ruling on Janus v. AFSCME,” said JB Pritzker. “While Bruce Rauner relentlessly pursued this special interest agenda, our state was decimated by his manufactured 736-day budget crisis. This is just another example of Rauner partnering with anti-worker special interest groups like the Illinois Policy Institute and the National Right to Work Foundation to pursue his own agenda over the best interests of working families. Illinois needs a governor who understands that unions built our middle class, not one who fights to undermine our workers at every turn. The fight is far from over and when I’m governor, Illinois’ working families will have a champion and an ally who will stand with them in the workplace and on the picket line.”
* A bunch all at once…
“Unions will always be the most effective force and vehicle to propel working people into the middle class. Despite this unprecedented and nefarious political attack – designed to further rig the rules against working people — nothing changes the fact that America needs unions now more than ever. We are more resolved than ever to fight like hell to win for our members and the communities they care so much about. AFSCME members don’t do this work to get rich. They do it because it’s a calling — and for that service, they deserve respect. They deserve the same freedoms as the CEOs and billionaires who continue to rig the rules against everyone else. The American labor movement lives on, and we’re going to be there every day, fighting hard for all working people, our freedoms and for our country.” - Lee Saunders, President, AFSCME
“No court case, win or lose, could ever change how important my work and service is to me and the community I care about. My union gives me the strength, freedom and the tools I need to help people and to provide for my family. That’s why I’ll always stick with my coworkers, no matter what. We’re going to keep doing what we’ve been doing: organizing and talking to coworkers and community members, building power for working people.” - Stephen Mittons, AFSCME Council 31 member, Child Protection Investigator for the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services
“Don’t count us out. While today the thirst for power trumped the aspirations and needs of communities and the people who serve them, workers are sticking with the union because unions are still the best vehicle working people have to get ahead.
“Strong unions create strong communities. We will continue fighting, caring, showing up and voting, to make possible what is impossible for individuals acting alone. The teacher walkouts this spring, with educators fighting for the funding children need, were an example of how we will continue to make that case—in the halls of statehouses and the court of public opinion, in our workplaces and communities, and at the ballot box in November—through organizing, activism and members recommitting to their union.
“This is a dark day in U.S. jurisprudence. Swung by a Trump-appointed justice with a long history of ruling for the wealthy and corporations over regular people, the Supreme Court overturned a 40-year unanimously decided precedent that has given teachers and firefighters, nurses and cops, a path to a better life for themselves and their communities.
“More than forty years ago, the court recognized that collective bargaining for teachers and other public sector workers benefits those workers, their employers and their communities. Union representation, if chosen by a majority, is the glue that holds us together. That wisdom has now been abandoned by the slimmest majority.
“The dissenting justices saw this case for what it really was—a warping and weaponizing of the First Amendment, absent any evidence or reason, to hurt working people. Not only was Abood well within the mainstream of First Amendment law, it has been affirmed six times and applied to other cases upholding bar fees for lawyers and student activity fees at public colleges.” -Randi Weingarten, President, AFT
“Regardless of the Supreme Court ruling, the teachers in our district will stick together to make sure we have a say in the future of our kids. We are a small union in a rural and conservative part of Ohio. But nearly all of the teachers in our district are full dues-paying members—because we know that teachers’ ability to create a safe learning environment for kids and make teaching a viable profession comes directly from being part of a strong union.” - Holly Kimpon, a high school biology and anatomy teacher, AFT member and president of the Genoa Area Education Association in Ohio
“Today’s radical decision by the Supreme Court is a blatant slap in the face for educators, nurses, firefighters, police officers and all public servants who make our communities strong and safe. We are living in a system that is rigged to benefit special interests and billionaires, all at the expense of working people. Those behind this case know that unions amplify workers’ voices and transform their words into powerful and collective action. Even though the Supreme Court sided with corporate CEOs and billionaires over working Americans, unions will continue to be the best vehicle on the path to the middle class.” - Lily Eskelsen García, President, National Education Association (NEA)
“Fine arts programs were being cut from my school and students were missing out on subjects like arts and music. My union negotiated with the district to bring back music so our students could have a well-rounded curriculum. When some school principals tried to renege on the agreement, as a union, we stepped up. Educators came together through our union and spoke out for what our kids need. Strong unions build strong schools and strong communities. We need unions now more than ever.” - Alex Price, band director and instrumental music teacher, Belmont High School and Wright Brothers Middle School in Dayton, Ohio
“This decision is yet another example of how billionaires rig the system against working people, but SEIU members won’t let the extremists behind this case divide us. We will stay united, help workers who are fighting to form unions, and call on our elected leaders to do everything in their power to make it easier for working people to join together in unions.” - Mary Kay Henry, President, SEIU
* Jake…
Illinois Working Together Campaign Director Jake Lewis released the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME:
“Bruce Rauner has made it crystal clear from Day One that his top priority as governor is to slash wages, undercut worker protections, and gut benefits by attacking the ability of working people to form strong unions.
“While Rauner may think today’s decision gets him closer to those ends, he and his special interest friends will never stop our movement to protect working families and build a strong middle class in Illinois.”
* Council 31…
AFSCME Council 31 response to US Supreme Court opinion
The United States Supreme Court ruled today against working people and in favor of billionaire CEOs and corporate interests in Janus v. AFSCME Council 31, holding that requiring fair-share fees in the public sector violates the First Amendment of the Constitution.
“This case is a blatant political attack by Bruce Rauner and other wealthy interests on the freedom of working people to form strong unions,” AFSCME Council 31 Executive Director Roberta Lynch said. “We are extremely disappointed the Supreme Court has taken the side of the powerful few, but we’re more determined than ever to keep our union strong, standing up for public services and the working people who provide them.”
Originally filed by the billionaire Republican governor Rauner, the case was taken up by the National Right-to-Work Foundation and the litigation arm of the Illinois Policy Institute, a Rauner-backed group whose national parent—the State Policy Network—said its intent in bringing the case was to “defund” the labor movement nationwide.
“No court case will prevent us from standing together in our union and speaking up for ourselves, our families and our communities,” said Stephen Mittons, a child protection investigator in Chicago.
“We know it’s through our union that we have the ability to stand up together for the fair pay and decent benefits that all working people deserve,” said Kristen Nolen, a public health worker in Springfield. “We’ll never quit, because we know that our state and our country need strong unions and working people need a strong voice.”
“The powerful interests behind this case have tens of millions of dollars to pour into their political agenda of trying to silence us. But we aren’t afraid and we aren’t going anywhere,” Council 31 Director Lynch said. “We’re making certain that every union member knows the real intent of this case is to defund unions, then drive down wages and benefits of public service workers. We’re not going to let that happen.”
* Rep. Skillicorn…
Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturned a 1977 U.S. Supreme Court case, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education. The decision favors plaintiff Mark Janus, a child support specialist from Illinois who argued that his union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), violated his First Amendment rights by engaging in political speech with which he did not agree.
According to research by the Illinois Policy Institute, the five major government unions in Illinois doled out a combined $46 million to political campaigns between 2002 and 2014. Making the biggest recipient of money confiscated from workers’ paychecks, politicians.
“Let me be crystal clear, this is about political special interests, not labor. Workers who wish to remain members of their union are unaffected by the ruling. This is a major victory for worker rights and democracy.” said Allen Skillicorn.
The time has come to ensure that this freedom is enshrined in law for workers in Illinois. Representative Allen Skillicorn’s Worker Freedom bills: HB673 and HB4419 allow employees to organize, negotiate, or bargain collectively with their employers through representatives of their own free choice, and protecting them should they choose not to.
Allen Skillicorn commented, “Union members should have a choice, everyone should have a choice. It’s the right thing to do.”
* LIUNA…
Terry O’Sullivan, General President of LIUNA – the Laborers’ International Union of North America – made the following statement today on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Janus v. AFSCME Council 31:
LIUNA proudly represents tens of thousands of dedicated, hard-working public employees who are undaunted by the Janus decision.
The Court has abandoned sound legal precedent and sided with anti-worker interests whose aim is to weaken unions by seeking to force unions and those who support us to bear the cost of representing free-riders. While the plaintiff’s backers claim this case is about “freedom of speech” nothing could be further from the truth. The Janus case represents an all-out attack on public sector unions meant to diminish the bargaining power of millions of public sector workers and divide us in the workplace.
Despite the cynical efforts of the anti-worker groups financing Janus, union membership has always and will always strengthen the middle class and help build our nation’s prosperity.
The strong, proud, and united members of LIUNA will continue to stand together and fight together to protect the wages, benefits, and working conditions that come with a union card.
* Chicago Fed…
Chicago Federation of Labor President Bob Reiter released the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Janus v AFSCME Council 31:
“Today the U.S. Supreme Court turned its back on working families across this country and sided with corporate billionaires with their ruling in the Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 case.
“This case was never about Mark Janus and what he believed was a violation of his First Amendment right to free speech. The Janus case is really about the super-rich attempting to dismantle what unions have won and continue to win for all working people. The interests behind the Janus case want to strip away working people’s freedom to join together in strong unions. Strong unions bring corporations to the table to bargain with workers for decent wages, affordable health benefits, safe worksites, time off to care for a loved one and dignity in retirement.
“This decision will not break the spirit of American workers, and it will not break the unions who defend them. Strong unions will continue to form in the workplace to fight for economic and social justice. Workers from coast to coast will continue to stand together in solidarity. We will continue to fight for a stronger America that values the work of all people, not just the elite few.”
* Kwame Raoul…
State Senator Kwame Raoul, candidate for Illinois Attorney General, issued the following statement regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME Council 31. The court held today, 5-4, that public-sector employees who are not union members but who benefit from the union’s collective bargaining activities may no longer be required to pay fair-share fees to support those services.
Illinois working people are under attack, and their ability to take collective action is one of the last lines of defense against the erosion and deliberate undermining of adequate pay and protections. Today’s decision, enabled by Bruce Rauner and the powerful special interests that initiated and funded this lawsuit, aims another blow at workers standing together to bargain for better working conditions and stronger communities.
This ruling is also a reminder of the role Illinois’ attorney general can play in defending workers, even when they cannot count on protection from the federal government or the courts.
As the state’s top lawyer, I will aggressively enforce labor laws and defend the right to bargain collectively. I’ve spent my career advocating for working people, sponsoring and supporting legislation to raise the minimum wage, enforce equal pay, guarantee paid sick time, create a robust Worker Protection Unit in the Office of the Attorney General and protect survivors of domestic violence while they are at work. Illinois workers and their families can count on me to speak out for policies that empower them, while politicians from the White House to the Governor’s Mansion continue plotting against the economic security of the middle class.
Unions of working people secured many of the workplace protections that both union and non-union employees rely on today. The movement to weaken their collective voice is a threat to all Illinoisans going forward. Today’s decision puts the ball in our court to strengthen workers’ rights at the state level. I stand in solidarity with labor, and I’m ready to take on this fight as attorney general.
* Rep. Mitchell…
Today, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Janus in the workers’ rights case Janus v. AFSCME. In response, Representative Christian Mitchell released the following statement:
“The Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME is a heartbreaking blow to all of the middle class, but to people of color in particular. Teachers, first responders, sanitation workers, and other frontline government employees have been the foundation of the oldest black middle class communities in the country, like Chatham in Chicago, because we never finished de-segregating the private sector. Black women especially have always been over represented in these unions, and the good wages and stability afforded to them have been the backbone of our neighborhoods. It is shameful that Governor Bruce Rauner continues to put his special interest agenda above the best interests of Illinois’ working families.”
* Hizzoner…
STATEMENT FROM MAYOR EMANUEL ON SUPREME COURT JANUS DECISION
“This morning, the Supreme Court upended decades of precedent and progress for working families. I have worked closely with organized labor in stabilizing Chicago pension funds and employees’ retirement security, ensuring responsible wage growth and managing the cost of health care. From rank-and-file membership to leadership, I have always found a willingness to come to the table, roll up their sleeves and get the job done in a way that is responsible and respectful of taxpayer dollars. Governor Rauner and many Republicans are rejoicing at today’s decision, but we should be clear that this is no cause for celebration. This decision is an insult to the middle class and a step back for progress.”
* Lightfoot…
Following is a statement from mayoral candidate Lori Lightfoot in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME.
“Every worker deserves the right to collectively bargain, to earn a living wage, and to be protected from harassment and abuse–but with this disastrous ruling, these fundamental rights are an even more distant dream.
“It’s also important to remember the heightened consequences of this decision for people of color and for women of color in particular, who face pervasive discrimination in the workplace ranging from sexual harassment to the wage gap.
“As mayor, I will stand with public sector unions and against the Trump administration to guarantee security and opportunity for every Chicagoan.”
* Durbin…
U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) released the following statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME):
In Illinois, Governor Bruce Rauner has made it clear that he favors corporations and special interests over Illinois workers and their families. He has repeatedly pushed an agenda of hostility to unions. This agenda is hurting workers across Illinois. And now, Governor Rauner has spearheaded a litigation effort, which has resulted in the Supreme Court overturning a 40-year-old precedent and further rigging the economy against hardworking Americans across the country.
This decision will drive down wages and reduce benefits – like health care and retirement – at a time when American workers are already struggling. I will keep fighting on behalf of families in Illinois and across the country for policies that create an economy that works for everyone.
* RGA…
This decision is a win for the First Amendment and the freedom of government employees to exercise their right to free association, rather than be forced to contribute to government unions that often refuse to represent their political views. Today, freedom and government workers won and triumphed against the powerful special interests.
* Foster…
Today, Congressman Bill Foster (D-IL) issued the following statement on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Janus v. AFSCME:
“I am deeply concerned that this decision will weaken our strong labor unions that have historically given our workers a safer work environment, fair wages, and collective bargaining rights against unfair working conditions. They hold a special place in our country’s history. This decision overturns decades of legal precedent that allowed unions to collect fair share fees for the services they are legally required to provide their workers. Our country was built on the hard work that so many Americans invested in our factories and offices. I’ll continue to fight for labor unions so we can build a strong middle class and make sure that workers have the collective bargaining rights they deserve.”
* Citizen Action/Illinois…
Citizen Action/Illinois Co-Director William McNary gave the following statement:
“This case, pushed by right-wing political interests, is intended to rob working people of their voice on the job. It’s nothing more than a naked attempt to gut the power of working people.
“But we know that in the fight for social justice, civil rights, gender equity and a fair economy, strong unions are more important than ever. Here in Illinois our elected officials must make it easier, not harder, for working people to have a voice through their union. We won’t let a rich and powerful few use this case to obscure the fact that we all do better when we all do better.”
* IDCCA…
Statement from Doug House, President of the Illinois Democratic County Chairs’ Association
Regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Janus v. AFSCME Council 31
“If there is any doubt in the Republican-led claims that Bruce Rauner is worst GOP governor in the nation, today’s Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 decision fortifies that truth.
Working and middle-class Illinoisans have every right to be disgusted with Bruce Rauner and his feckless celebration of the Supreme Court’s decision to erode collective bargaining rights and drop incomes and wages to levels below the worker wastelands of places like Mississippi.
Bruce Rauner and the Republicans who have funded, supported and advocated to dismantle the rights of working people are driven by a personal greed and goal of total economic control. Any talk, suggestion or rhetoric implying that taxpayers and ordinary families are winners in this decision camouflages Bruce Rauner’s vile goals to further enrich himself by silencing the collective voice of dissent.
This Supreme Court was designed by elitist Republicans and their wealthy funders to be comprised of hyper-partisan activist judges. The Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 decision is one of the few reasons why the GOP-led U.S. Senate refused to give President Obama his constitutional right to appoint a Supreme Court justice.
Make no mistake, the motivations for this case are rapacious and the implications of this decision are serious. But for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. As a card-carrying union member for nearly three decades, I don’t accept the loss of worker dignity as one of casualties of today’s decision. The callous work of Bruce Rauner does more to mobilize ordinary, working people all over Illinois.
The IDCCA stands with organized labor because unions fight to ensure that economic opportunity is afforded to everyone who is willing to sweat and strive for it. Neither a court decision or a costumed, lame-duck governor can strip that away.”
* Quigs…
Today, U.S. Representative Mike Quigley (IL-05), released the following statement in response to the Janus v. ASFME decision, where the Supreme Court ruled that public sector unions’ long-held practice of collecting “fair share fees” for the services they are legally required to provide workers is unconstitutional:
“The Janus v AFSCME Supreme Court ruling just reversed four decades of precedent to undermine the freedom of our laborers, teachers, police officers, firefighters, factory and transportation workers, and more. Today’s flawed decision is just another example in a litany of instances where conservative judges, Republican elected officials, and their donors have attempted to rig the economy against hardworking Americans for the benefit of billionaires. By increasing the number of free riding workers, unions could be forced to drastically reduce their budgets, which in turn will weaken their ability to negotiate stronger contracts and defend the rights of American workers who deserve a fair wage and a fair workplace.
“As a proud Chicgoan, I understand the important role unions play in rebuilding and strengthening the shrinking middle class. I will continue to partner with my Democratic colleagues to defend unions and support legislative solutions that will guarantee that all public-sector workers have the freedom to stand together and negotiate for fair working conditions. Conservatives must stop attacking workers and start helping to create a system that benefits everyone. This must also include investing in the schools, public safety programs, and transportation systems that provide opportunity to our communities.”
* Tillman…
Illinois Policy Institute CEO John Tillman released the following statement:
“Workers’ rights were restored today because of two people: Mark Janus and Bruce Rauner.
“First, I’d like to thank Gov. Bruce Rauner for having the vision, the leadership and the courage to initiate this case in 2015. He took tremendous risk and criticism for advancing the simple idea that workers should be free to define their relationship with a government union.
“Most importantly, I want to thank Mark Janus. Without a plaintiff, you have no case. We are very proud that Mark Janus chose our litigation team at the Liberty Justice Center to represent him. We thank Mark for his courage and for his commitment to worker freedom. Mark has earned the admiration of millions of people all over the country who simply wanted their free speech rights protected.”
* AG Madigan…
Attorney General Lisa Madigan issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Janus v. AFSCME case:
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a major attack on union representation in this country. Unions’ ability to organize and advocate on behalf of workers has been vital to creating and sustaining a strong middle class. The decision destroys the role government unions play in ensuring that workers, including millions of women and people of color, have a strong voice in their workplace. I will continue to stand with workers to support their rights.”
* Rush…
Today, U.S. Representative Bobby L. Rush (D-Ill.) released the following statement expressing his disappointment in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 which weakens labor unions to the benefit of billionaires and corporations:
“This decision is the result of a concerted and corrupt effort by the wealthy and well-connected to divide hardworking people and make it more difficult for them to stand together as a union. Today’s ruling will do nothing but perpetuate a rigged economy that reduces the opportunities available to working-class Americans.
“I am appalled by this decision that upends over four decades of labor precedent and alters the freedoms and benefits that workers have enjoyed by collectively joining together and negotiating for better pay, better jobs, and — ultimately — a better future.
“While the Supreme Court has, once again, sided with the billionaire class and corporate CEOs, I continue to stand in steadfast support of the working men and women of our country and those in the 1st Congressional District of Illinois and completely support the freedom to join together for the good, union jobs our communities need.
“Unions have defined and built the America we know today. We should be working day and night to protect and improve the lives of all workers — whether or not they are members of a union. The work unions have done in organizing has ultimately raised wages, guaranteed access to healthcare, and strengthened our communities.
“It was fifty years ago that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stood with striking Memphis sanitation workers demanding the freedom to join unions the night before he was killed. As he told the crowd that night, ‘Freedom is not something that is voluntarily given by the oppressor. It is something that must be demanded by the oppressed.’
“I want my constituents to know that I take that message to heart and I remain resolute in my commitment to fight for the needs of working Americans.”
* McCann…
Conservative gubernatorial candidate Sam McCann made the following statement:
This case is a clear attack on workers’ ability to stand up for better conditions at work, and it all started with Bruce Rauner, who was the original plaintiff in the case.
A true small-government conservative would never advocate for the government forcing a business to provide its services for free, but this just one piece of the anti-worker agenda that Bruce Rauner has used to hold Illinois hostage over the past four years.
Workers in Illinois are calling for a change from policies that weaken their voices at work and shrink their paychecks. Illinois’ working families are not the enemy, but the solution, and they can count on me to give them the respect they deserve.
* CTU…
Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey issued a statement after the ruling likening Emanuel, who was presiding over a City Council meeting, to Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner, a driving force behind the Janus case.
“Today we will see neoliberal Democratic Party political bosses like Rahm Emanuel shaking their fist at this decision, acting as if they have not been bipartisan partners in the erosion of workers’ rights, co-conspirators in the austerity movement and willing allies in the theft of job and retirement security,” Sharkey said.
“While today’s attack will hit all working families hard, in Chicago it will disproportionately hurt Black and Latinx households already reeling from the foreclosure crisis, cuts to social services, school closures, unrelenting violence and high unemployment. Rahm has done nothing to address the needs of these constituencies or these critical issues – or at least, nothing good.”
* Schneider…
Today, Congressman Brad Schneider (IL-10), released the below statement on the 5-4 ruling of the Supreme Court in Janus v. AFSCME:
“Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court is an attack on the right of public sector workers to negotiate for decent pay and workplace protections. In their decision, the Justices brushed aside more than four decades of legal precedent and denied unions the ability to collect ‘fair share fees’ for the services and benefits they provide to all workers, regardless of union membership.
“Unions helped build our nation’s middle class, and today’s ruling fits a pattern of attacks to undermine labor and working families, and weaken workers’ right to negotiate for better pay, working conditions, medical benefits, retirement benefits, and paid leave. This is a sad day for hard-working Americans including teachers, firefighters, police officers, civil servants, and more – good people who serve our public every day.”
* Preckwinkle…
Statement from Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle
On U.S. Supreme Court Decision in the Janus vs. AFSCME Case
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in the Janus vs. AFSCME case today is the culmination of yet another partisan effort to weaken and undercut public employee unions. Janus was funded and supported by corporate interest groups that want to make it harder for workers to stand united. The decision means that public sector employees can now choose to not pay fair share dues to the unions that secure for them fair wages and safe working conditions. Collective bargaining remains important to the fabric of our nation’s working landscape and I will continue to support unions and the efforts undertaken to protect working families.
* Progressives…
-Following is a statement from the Chicago City Council Progressive Reform Caucus in response to the Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 Supreme Court decision:
“The Supreme Court’s radical Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 decision today is a brazen, unprecedented effort to weaken the political power of the working class in this country and further rig the system on behalf of billionaires and big corporations. As elected leaders, we are firmly committed to continuing to stand up and fight back against the anti-worker agenda of Gov. Rauner and the Trump administration. We will always stand with the public employees keep our communities safe and healthy–and we will continue to defend workers’ right to organize, bargain collectively, and stand up to right wing attacks.”
* Harmon…
State Senator Don Harmon (D-Oak Park) issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of Mark Janus today, dealing a major blow to unions across the country:
“I had hoped that a conservative Supreme Court would hew to the bedrock conservative law and economics principles I learned at the University of Chicago Law School, but it would seem Bruce Rauner’s obsessive anti-union agenda has inspired them to liberal judicial activism.
“The law should not support economic “free riders”—those who benefit from services for which they do not pay. The Janus decision is an affront to that principle. It allows workers to reap the benefits of collective bargaining without paying for the efforts it takes.
“Republicans in Congress fought hard to delay hearings and deny Barack Obama his Supreme Court pick, and they were not disappointed today. It’s a shame that the U.S. Supreme Court is now, like Congress, just another appendage of the Trump White House. So much for the brilliant separation of powers the framers laid out in the Constitution.”
* Troy LaRaviere…
Today five right-wing activist appointees on U.S. Supreme court ruled that freeloaders could reap salary increases, health care coverage, and other benefits fought for by their unions without having to pay their fair share of the cost of union organizing. These judges falsely and misleadingly argued that workers should not have to pay dues to a union if they disagreed with the unions’ political speech. If these judges truly believed their own argument, then that same court might rule we don’t have to pay our taxes if we don’t agree with the poison that comes out of the mouth of the head of the executive branch of our government. Of course, they won’t. They won’t because speech has nothing to do with this decision. Their decision was a continuation of an assault on the working people of this country by billionaires and their enablers. It is my hope and belief that this case will be a lightning rod for working families to organize and make the enemies of working people deeply regret their decision to push the Janus case forward.
51 Comments
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|