United States: The US Supreme Court on Tuesday denied Alaska’s petition to revive a Republican policy geared towards empowering state workers to duck payment of union dues in the latest attempt at curbing unions representing public employees’ interests.
Lower Court Decision Upheld
The Supreme Court declined to hear the state’s appeal of a lower court finding that concluded that a union’s collection of dues from public employees it represents without their specific written authorization did not violate their free speech rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In 2019, Republican Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy issued an administrative order that prevented unions representing government workers from collecting dues unless employees signed releases. However, a lower court decision later invalidated that policy in an action initiated by the state of Alaska against its largest public-sector union.
In the last decade, there has been a tendency of The Supreme Court, with its 6.3-conservative majority, to restrict labor unions in judgments.
Janus Decision Impact
The Alaska case was the latest effort by Republicans and conservative organizations to stretch out of a 2018 Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME that came from February last year. In that case, the justices held that employees who do not join unions representing them in collective bargaining negotiations cannot be compelled to contribute fees toward these negotiating costs.
Janus was considered a major victory for anti-public sector union forces. But contrary to what some analysts had predicted, the ruling did not have a catastrophic effect on union finances.
Alaska’s Legal Challenge
In 2019, Alaska sued ASEA to disavow its mechanism of collecting dues on the representation of about 8,000 from approximately 15 347 state employees in Alaska. ASEA is a member of the Association of Federal, State County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), which is America’s largest labor union representing public sector employees. It symbolizes administrative, technical, and professional staff in particular state agencies.
Limited Impact on ASEA Policy
It is only during a 10-day period each year that ASEA members are free to cancel their membership. The Janus ruling did not invalidate that policy, although ASEA has not said anything about it. The state contends that restricting when nonunion members can waive their union membership offends the First Amendment.
In Janus, the US Supreme Court held that so-called “agency fees” charged to nonunion public employees violate their First Amendment rights through compulsory subsidies of union political speech. Agency fees were smaller than union dues and included only collective bargaining and administrative costs.
Alaska had contended in the lawsuit that ever since Janus, public employees should be obliged to notify their state if they want unions to deduct money via a union procedure for withholding dues.
In 2023, the Alaska Supreme Court upheld a state judge’s decision to dismiss the complaint.
Support for Alaska’s Cause
Alaska received support from 11 other Republican-led states and several conservative organizations, including Mark Janus, the plaintiff in the 2018 Supreme Court case.
Leave a Reply