Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

* UPDATED x1 * Janus apparently no longer loves his state job, hires on with Illinois Policy Institute

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

[Comments opened and Friday post bumped up to Monday for visibility.]

My name is Mark Janus, and I am the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case Janus v. AFSCME. I am a child support specialist for state government in Illinois. Quite simply, my job is to help people. When parents aren’t together anymore, I work to ensure that children receive all the financial support available to them.

I love my job. Serving others is part of who I am. But in order to do this type of work, I am forced to check my First Amendment rights at the door. That’s why I’ve asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in.

Emphasis added.

* Press release…

Mark Janus joins Illinois Policy Institute as senior fellow

Janus to serve as spokesman, workers’ rights advocate after the historic Supreme Court victory in Janus v. AFSCME, helping workers across the country understand their restored First Amendment rights

CHICAGO (July 20, 2018) — Mark Janus will be joining the Illinois Policy Institute and the Liberty Justice Center as a senior fellow effective Aug. 1.

STATEMENT FROM MARK JANUS

“I’ve respected the work of the Illinois Policy Institute and the Liberty Justice Center since first connecting with them in 2015. As I’ve worked with them more closely over the years, I’ve come to admire both the staff and the mission of the organizations. With their professionalism and ability to speak out on issues that affect not only Illinois but also the entire country, I’m looking forward to adding my voice to this fine team.

“Every day, their staff is working to turn around the state of Illinois and I am grateful for the opportunity to spend the remainder of my career doing something I believe in. I look forward to helping make a difference for workers in the state and across the U.S.”

STATEMENT FROM ILLINOIS POLICY INSTITUTE CEO JOHN TILLMAN

“We are thrilled that Mark has decided to bring his invaluable insight to our team after a long, hard fight at the Supreme Court. During the years that this case took to reach its conclusion, I have had the privilege of watching Mark express his core values on free speech and worker freedom over and over again. He is articulate, courageous and committed to the cause of empowering workers. He will be touring the country to make sure workers understand their rights and to share with workers and other people interested in his Supreme Court case what the Janus win means.”

…Adding… Sun-Times…

“Once again it’s clear that this court case was never about Mark Janus, but about billionaires like Bruce Rauner and big-money corporate funders launching a political attack on the freedom of working people to speak up together through a strong union,” AFSCME Council 31 spokesman Anders Lindall said. “While IPI tries to dupe workers into quitting their union, AFSCME members will continue doing what they’ve always done: providing important public services and building their union to speak up for themselves, their families and communities.”

*** UPDATE *** Asked Monday by a reporter if he helped Janus get his new position, Gov. Rauner replied “I did not.” Asked if he had anything to do with Janus getting his new job, Rauner said “I did not.”

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 1:42 am

Comments

I guess he loved the thirty pieces of silver more.

Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:01 am
Now that his name is on a Supreme Court ruling, his name will be forever embedded in history, for generations to come, as the guy who sold out his coworkers. Was it worth it?

Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:07 am
==express his core values on free speech and worker freedom==

…at places and times we deem appropriate.

Comment by Jocko Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:08 am
I’m sure having secured a decent pension thanks to AFSCME representing him and his co-workers over the years makes the job move easier.

Comment by Montrose Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:10 am
Someone really embraced his family name.

Comment by Fixer Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:10 am
–“We are thrilled that Mark has decided to bring his invaluable insight to our team after a long, hard fight at the Supreme Court.–

Yeah, right. “Long, hard fight” and “invaluable insight.” Like Mandela.

For crying out loud, Janus agreed to put his name to a piece of paper for standing, nothing more. He was just a tool, in every sense of the word.

Not for nothing, but the Roman god, Janus, was two-faced. And this farce conjures up the Latin phrase “quid pro quo.”

Grifters gonna grift. Janus is where he belongs now. At least he’s off the taxpayer dime, and Sugar Daddy Dick can pay the rent for his “invaluable insight.”

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:12 am
==I guess he loved the thirty pieces of silver more.==

Now this is some solid commenting

Comment by PJ Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:12 am
Fixer for the win.

Comment by ryan Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:14 am
Give the poor guy a break. He said he wanted to be able to negotiate his own pay and benefits. The Supreme Court did not give him what he asked for, so why should he stay?

Comment by Whatever Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:15 am
==He said he wanted to be able to negotiate his own pay and benefits==

Sure, that was always what it was about. The ability of one non-essential employee to slash his own salary by bargaining without any leverage.

It had nothing to do with Mark mistakenly thinking his dues were going to Democratic political candidates, something he repeated constantly (included from DC just recently). The dude was used. If anything, I feel bad for him.

Comment by PJ Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:18 am
Now we know

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:20 am
“secured a decent pension thanks to AFSCME” Repeat after me…”Pensions are not a Union benefit.”

Comment by Skeptic Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:22 am
The snark is especially thick this morning. So he can’t decide he wants to do something else. He couldn’t stand up for a principle and then decide it was time to do something else in his life. Maybe we’d all be better off if some of our life term legislators resigned and did something else.

Comment by NeverPoliticallyCorrect Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:22 am
After hearing this I can’t stop thinking of George Costanza and the fire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TuEWtXBT_0

Comment by Past the Rule of 85 Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:22 am
Wonder how careful they all were using the email machines? I assume FOIA requests might have some interesting insight into “freedom of speech…”

Comment by W.S. Wolcott Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:23 am
Man, a lot of these comments are harsh. People leave their jobs all the time for new opportunities.

Congratulations on the new job, Janus.

Comment by Not It Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:24 am
Afscme bargained for some good raises for him which is reflected in his pension

He was making 70k

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:26 am
I’m guessing that his job was no longer as much fun. When his co-workers resented his presence. I don’t begrudge the man his continued pension and retiree health insurance - if he’s eligible for that. I do resent him allowing the use of his name, likeness, etc for the court case and then leaving and not having to deal with the future repercussions to employees based on the court case. Kind of unfair to get the rules changed for everyone and then escaping those new rules himself. I also wonder if this wasn’t a secret ageeemebt from the start.

Comment by Thoughts Matter Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:30 am
He was what we thought he was. A guy who got played, and thinks he will reap the benefits of his betrayal. It will be interesting to see how long he lasts in his new job. I am thinking it will be a real short term move.

Comment by Retired Educator Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:31 am
==He couldn’t stand up for a principle and then decide it was time to do something else in his life==

No, he couldn’t, ’cause the “deciding to do something else with his life” kinda shows how hollow his “principle” was.

Thought experiment: If Mark Janus wants to say something a little pro-choice-y, how protected are his First Amendment rights going to be at IPI?

Comment by Arsenal Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:31 am
===He will be touring the country to make sure workers understand their rights===

I’m sure they appreciate it.

Comment by Nick Name Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:35 am
At least he paid AFSCME in fair share dues for representing him to get the pension he’ll receive.

Comment by Cook Street Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:35 am
=So he can’t decide he wants to do something else. He couldn’t stand up for a principle and then decide it was time to do something else in his life. =

The snark is especially thick this morning.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:36 am
Does he get an $18 watch as a bonus? Also, Im not quite clear on how is former occupation qualifies him for any sort of policy analyst position. He was a bill collector basically. Thats some skill set.

Comment by low level Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:37 am
Kind of brings to mind a dog being patted on the head and given a treat after a well performed trick.

Comment by Bemused Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:38 am
Janus is leaving his job he said he loves, now that he has his “free speech,” to persuade workers to leave unions.

That should be very convincing.

Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:39 am
His new job is a blatant payoff for being a willing tool by IPI.

Comment by PublicServant Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:53 am
-“secured a decent pension thanks to AFSCME” Repeat after me…”Pensions are not a Union benefit.”-

If you don’t see the connection between the work of the union and state employee’s pensions, I can’t help you.

Comment by Montrose Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:57 am
Standing with the abortion governor in DC, or the prolife constitutionalist in Illinois

Comment by Rabid Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:08 am
–A guy who got played,–

He didn’t get played, he go rewarded.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:08 am
===At least he paid AFSCME in fair share dues for representing him to get the pension he’ll receive.===

Pensions are not negotiated by AFSCME.

Comment by Nick Name Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:18 am
A lot of silly comments but this takes the cake:
“… Janus, was two-faced …”

You don’t know Mark at all. He has his convictions; he believes those; he does not change those for anyone. To be honest, we argue if this is a strength or a weakness and the joke ends the same every time … I do not care what you think, hence it is a strength in this argument.

Comment by I Miss Bentohs Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:21 am
“If you don’t see the connection between the work of the union and state employee’s pensions” Every SERS employee gets exactly the same pension deal, union or not. Not only that, but AFSCME isn’t the only union. So tell me again the connection?

Comment by Skeptic Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:21 am
“So tell me again the connection?”

Pensions are based on salaries. AFCSME negotiates salaries.

Comment by Montrose Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:26 am
“AFCSME negotiates salaries.” And…? Income taxes are based on salaries as well, so you’re saying that AFSCME affects that as well? What about SEIU? The Teamsters?

Comment by Skeptic Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:35 am
==You don’t know Mark at all. He has his convictions; he believes those; he does not change those for anyone.==

I know that he argued in his petition to the Supreme Court negotiating an employment contract with the State was political speech, that he wanted to negotiate his own contract, that it was a violation of his First Amendment rights to require him to let the union negotiate for him, and that he never said “boo” when the Supreme Court gave him cash instead of the First Amendment rights he claimed he wanted.

Comment by Whatever Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:44 am
‘Income taxes are based on salaries as well, so you’re saying that AFSCME affects that as well? What about SEIU? The Teamsters?”

Income taxes - sure, to the extent that he is paid a higher wage thanks to AFCSME negotiating better deal for state employees. Were it not for AFSCME’s wage negotiations, his pension would be lower. His income tax would also be lower. There are multiple impacts from being paid more thanks to union representation.

SEIU/Teamsters/Other Red Herrings - When there is a post about an employee represented by those unions, I will be happy to talk about them.

Comment by Montrose Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:44 am
“Were it not for AFSCME’s wage negotiations, his pension would be lower.” If you can’t tell the difference between causation and correlation, then I can’t help you.

Comment by Skeptic Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 11:04 am
This really looks like a quid pro quo. Just as “corrupt” as the cash handouts the Gov was making over the weekend.

Comment by Boone's is Back Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 11:05 am
Awhile ago this was simply the “payoff”
Then it became “pinstripe patronage”
What should we call it now? “Policy payola?” Somebody needs to come up with a good label.

PS I second Fixer for the win.

Comment by Suburbanon Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 11:20 am
=Man, a lot of these comments are harsh. People leave their jobs all the time for new opportunities.=

Not harsh enough. Why didn’t he leave his job before he fought for the job he “love(d)”? This is like when Rauner said the he “loves unions”. - total phonies and sellouts.

Comment by Deadbeat Conservative Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 12:21 pm
@deadbeat:

Couldn’t agree more. The fast food restaurant known the world over for its fries is vehemently anti-union. He could have been a fry dinker/salter and not had to have walked around with that tremendous “union” burden his whole life. Plus you get free meals during your shift.

Comment by Mike Cirrincione Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 12:48 pm
I think he just got tired of the wedgies and desk wrapped in Saran Wrap. /s

Comment by Arthur Andersen Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 2:23 pm
Hope This Guy Janis Sleeps Well With That Great Pension And Now New Conservative Job.. Thatta Boy..

Comment by Shake Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 2:59 pm
Does anybody know how Paprocki the politician is going to rationalize this?

Comment by Only blocked once so far Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 3:31 pm
This is strange. I thought he was on their payroll the whole time. /s

Comment by Jibba Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 4:01 pm
I’m sure he felt a lot of love after the decision came out. The pitchforks and mobs just adored him.

Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 4:08 pm
== I am thinking it will be a real short term move ==

Probably until Rauner’s check to the IPI doesn’t clear.

Comment by RNUG Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 4:24 pm
=I’m sure he felt a lot of love after the decision came out. The pitchforks and mobs just adored him.=

Pitchforks and mobs? If the USC accepted and overuled settled law based on false testimony about his job.
Or do you think that’s the way it’s supposed to work?

Comment by Deadbeat Conservative (TBB?) Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 4:29 pm
A ‘worker’s rights advocate” ???

My, how definitions have changed since the days of Mother Jones.

Comment by Stumpy's bunker Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 4:40 pm
As Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan said in her dissent, the court majority weaponized the First Amendment in this case.

Comment by A non Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 7:09 pm
I’m so glad he protected my right to call him a twoface petty rat.
Free speech on this case was such a strech. Just like Ives being MatiGans canidate. All lies.

Comment by Anon Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 7:29 pm
In fairness, Rauner already paid off Dunkin, so it WAS IPI’s turn…

Comment by Morty Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 7:38 pm
Quiting for the, turn in, turn on, drop out, national empowerment tour

Comment by Rabid Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 8:18 pm
–Does anybody know how Paprocki the politician is going to rationalize this?–

The Holy Goalie hides behind his collar.

If you check in on him, he ain’t too cool with us Lutherans, either.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 10:42 pm