Perhaps the most critical reason Democrats must win the White House in November is that the next President will likely appoint two or three Supreme Court Justices. At 82, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is likely to retire first. She us the most liberal Justice. If a Republican replaces her The Fascist Five Injustices of SCROTUS (Republican Constitutional VD) will become the Swastika Six, and we can kiss America goodbye. In the meantime, will SCROTUS gut Public Unions.
Harlan Elrich is a high school teacher in California, and that means he must pay about $970 a year to a labor union. He teaches math, and he said the system did not add up.“I get to choose what movie I want to go see,” Mr. Elrich said. “I get to choose what church I want to go to. I get to choose what gym I want to join.”
He should have the same choice, he said, about whether to support a union.
Mr. Elrich and nine other California teachers have sued the union, saying that they are being forced to pay to support positions with which they disagree, in violation of the First Amendment. Their lawsuit, if it is successful, will be the culmination of a decades-long legal campaign to undermine public unions.
And there is good reason to think they will win. The Supreme Court, which will hear arguments in the case on Monday, has twice suggested that the First Amendment bars forcing government workers to make payments to unions…
Inserted from <NY Times>
Looking at this the arguments made by Elrich, a Republican Party front, the presence of a union does not leave him without choices. He can work for a private school or in another field. The decision to unionize has been made by the majority of teachers, state by state. Teachers unionized long before Elrich began the specialized education to become a teacher, knowing there was a union. He made his choice then.
If being forced to support positions with which we disagree violates the First Amendment, most of us should have a big tax refund coming, since paying to support positions with which we disagree is a regular feature of any Republic, even a nominal one like ours.
I started paying taxes in 1962, so each of my tax dollars spent for the Vietnam War, The Iraq War, financing Israel’s repression of the Palestinian people, capital punishment, LGBT repression, mandatory minimums, private prisons, and many more items has been forced payment to support positions with which I disagree. Should I expect a refund check next week?
11 Responses to “Will SCROTUS Gut Public Unions?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Also, he gets benefits he probably wants from that money he pays from a better negotiated contract via union representation in terms of job protection, pension, health insurance, pay scale and work hours…similar cases in CA consistently have lost because of the position of wanting some things without paying for it. No CA court would agree–his only hope is this horribly politicized SCOTUS.
Short answer is yes. EXCEPT for police unions. They would be the – um – sacred pig of unions.
No, buddy. Only in your dreams! Elrich had a choice long ago and now must live within the lines of the profession he CHOSE!
Oops. I missed the main question. If the gerrymandering is as bad as it has been in the past, we may never see a Democrat in the office of President again! And if we don't get a Democratic President, SCROTUS will become the No-Brains Nine! Then ALL the unions of any kind will be gone and Mr. Elrich can contemplate his problems on minimum wage for pay while he is teaching his pupils!
SCOTUS has ruled that “Corporations are people, my friend”
SCOTUS has ruled that Corporations can impose their religious beliefs on you
SCOTUS has ruled that Corporations can give unlimited amounts of cast to buy elections
Corporations have been permitted to pay workers a pittance – while CEO salaries & benfits skyrocket
Corporations have been granted so many loopholes that a lot of them don’t pay ANY TAXES at all
Corporations are fine with wantonly harming the environment – and with no fines levied – if it increases their bottom line
Corporations’ cumulative YUUUGGE subsidies prove that THEY are the nations true “Welfare Queens”
… So, SCOTUS, tell me again why you think Unions are the problem?
Ummmmm – maybe because unions can't bribe them as handsomely as corporations can?
SCROTUS can be expected to find for the plaintiff, here, as it is simply what the sick five would naturally lean towards, in their sick natures. Don't forget that St. Reagan, who proudly destroyed the Air Traffic Controllers Union, had a hand in appointing some of these idiots.
"I started paying taxes in 1962, so each of my tax dollars spent for the Vietnam War, The Iraq War, financing Israel’s repression of the Palestinian people, capital punishment, LGBT repression, mandatory minimums, private prisons, and many more items has been forced payment to support positions with which I disagree. Should I expect a refund check next week?" I started a bit before that, so we'll party together, when we get that refund? Yeah, just like when we get our Ronnie R.'s "trickle down" money.
SINAName: Maybe, also, because the conservatives have been upset that unions financially support candidates who are NOT conservatives?
I'm from Illinois – and I belong to SEIU as a homecare worker. NOBODY has to join the Union to be a homecare worker (either thru DHS or Addus or whatever agency) but they do have to pay a TINY (under $50 per pay period) user fee (I it's called Fair Share or something) because the Union negotiates our benefits, insurance, raises etc. & that costs money! The Republican cheapskates who refuse to join, but still want everything the Union provides, try to say that the fee is for a political agenda they don't support – but the political pac money is Separate & you have to sign waivers to get that Donation taken out of your pay (I contribute $5-$10) per pay period (it's a TINY percentage & even Union members have to Volunteer it)! Gov. Rauner has inserted himself into the Supreme Court case by fronting money for the 3 or 4 people in Illinois stupid enough to cut their own throats by forcing this issue! SEIU is STILL negotiating our contract (we haven't had a Contract since July 1st, 2015, but we sued to be paid since then & so far we have) – Rauner has tried to cut hours to our consumers, cut our healthcare insurance (which we've only had for the last 5 years!), and wants us to take a pay Cut ($13 per hour is not really living wage in Illinois!)..Billionaires don't CARE about real people! He wants Illinois to become another Wisconsin or Michigan..right to work (for Less!) states.
We need a Democrat in the White House for many reasons, but this is one of utmost importance. The current SCOTUS is bad enough, but we still have Ginsberg. If a Republican gets the White House the middle class will be thoroughly wiped out, even though it almost is now. I never worked in a job that had a union, but my Dad, brothers, uncles, grandparents, all did. As did my sister. Their unions protected the rest of us regarding wages and benefits. The guy who filed this suit is a Republican Shill, playing his role as being discriminated against. I bet he spends the money he makes because of his union.
Still having trouble with Care 2, can't answer e mails on there, and can seldom get a comment to go through on the articles I read.
Being forced to join a union is something unfamiliar to me, in either of my "home" countries. We are free to join a union, but if we don't a a strike breaks out, we can only join in at our own expense, and we can't count on any benefits they can get out of the negotiations. But unions being what they are, anything they come up with in favor of workers usually goes to everyone. So while nobody is forced to join and pay a contribution, any contribution is tax-deductible and any corporation/organization with a certain amount of employees (20, if I remember correctly) will have to pay union dues and will need a workers committee installed, trained by the unions with which they have to spar about anything concerning work, workers and circumstances (safety). So, while they are not as powerful as they used to be because membership has been declining, our unions still have a lot of influence, and rightly so.
So while forced membership is quite alien to me, knowing how unions in America have been brought down to their knees, I can quite understand that any further butchering by SCOTUS is very unwelcome indeed, and that is a huge understatement. Sadly, on this particular point I can see the point the plaintiff is making; it wouldn't be so bad if unions hadn't be cut down and made impotent by earlier judgments by SCOTUS that gave the 1% even more power and turned workers into slaves.
On the subject of replacing retiring SCOTUS justices: Ruth Bader Ginsburg is likely the first one to retire due to her age (and she truly deserves it after all she's done and tried to do for America) but in truth she should be the last to be let go for the sake of 90% of all Americans.
Thanks all! In countries where workers have rights, including the right to negotiate collectively, with or without a union manditiry membership makes no sense. Here, workers have few rights, so allowing people not to pay union dues, after the sho shop has voted the inion in, only gives management away to exploit workers. Thanks all!