Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court holds public sector unions in the balance
MSNBC ^ | June 29, 2014 | By Ned Resnikoff

Posted on 06/29/2014 8:41:38 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

The future of public sector unions is in the hands of the Supreme Court, which is expected to rule Monday on a key case that could send shockwaves throughout organized labor.

The Supreme Court has the power to make that happen. Depending how the nine justices rule in the Harris v. Quinn case, it is possible that automatic dues deduction could become a thing of the past for public sector unions.

The head plaintiff in the case is Pam Harris, an Illinois-based home care worker who says automatic dues deduction violates her First Amendment rights.

For the purposes of collective bargaining, Harris – whose job consists of caring for her son in her own home – is an employee of the state. The union, SEIU (Service Employees International Union), that represents publicly employed home care workers in Illinois automatically deducts Harris’ membership dues for her paychecks.

“I object to my home being a union workplace,” Harris told NPR in January, around the time the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: publicworkers; scotus; unions
Public sector unions are a massive indirect transfer of taxpayer funds to the democrat party. I expect SCOTUS to rule in their favor not on constitutional grounds, but because today's activist court supports the practice and the party. Roberts will once again be on the wrong side of the decision.

I hope I'm wrong.

1 posted on 06/29/2014 8:41:38 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer; BuckeyeTexan

I believe the Conservative caucus on the court will go 2-0 tomorrow.


2 posted on 06/29/2014 8:44:43 AM PDT by Perdogg (Ted Cruz-Rand Paul 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Yes pictures of Roberts’ children’s fake adoption papers have been slipped under his door. He’ll vote with unions.


3 posted on 06/29/2014 8:45:32 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

How can somebody be employed taking care of their own child in their own home? And how can a union collect dues for that?


4 posted on 06/29/2014 8:45:42 AM PDT by Gunpowder green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I’ve read that Scalia is the wild card..guess based on questions he was asking during oral arguments. Hoping they get this one right, public sector unions should be banned.


5 posted on 06/29/2014 8:47:44 AM PDT by rainee (Her)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
This would really put a crimp in Ubama's plan to unionize 21 million Ubamacare workers/Democrat voters.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/19/book-obamacare-law-designed-to-unionize-21-million-health-care-workers/

6 posted on 06/29/2014 8:48:31 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government." --Tacitus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

Scalia is the key. He ruled for the unions in a similar case back in the early 90’s.


7 posted on 06/29/2014 8:48:46 AM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rainee
Hoping they get this one right, public sector unions should be banned.

Even Left-wing extremist FDR agreed with that.

8 posted on 06/29/2014 8:49:14 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government." --Tacitus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gunpowder green
And how can a union collect dues for that?

The Bolshevik Gangster mindset: you aren't a human being, you're a "worker", and you owe the gang the Vig for "protection" from the Evil Employers....in her case, her customer.

9 posted on 06/29/2014 8:49:48 AM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

You will be wrong. The SC is going to flush the pub sector unions on this power and money grab


10 posted on 06/29/2014 8:50:47 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunpowder green

How can somebody be employed taking care of their own child in their own home? And how can a union collect dues for that?


It don’t get it either.

Union dues are pretty much like taxes that go to the democratic party.


11 posted on 06/29/2014 8:51:22 AM PDT by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gunpowder green

My first question too


12 posted on 06/29/2014 8:52:05 AM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Public sector unions are a massive indirect transfer of taxpayer funds to the democrat party. I expect SCOTUS to rule in their favor not on constitutional grounds, but because today’s activist court supports the practice and the party. Roberts will once again be on the wrong side of the decision.

I hope I’m wrong.


I agree with every word. The Constitution is worthless paper to the political activists on the court.


13 posted on 06/29/2014 8:52:53 AM PDT by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

It used to be that unions could only deduct, without permission, an amount to cover costs of negotiations but not their other expenses, such as political, organizing etc. What happened to that ?


14 posted on 06/29/2014 8:59:54 AM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: boycott

Union members need control over their money ,they’re being robbed blind


15 posted on 06/29/2014 9:04:01 AM PDT by molson209 (Blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: molson209

Union members need control over their money ,they’re being robbed blind.


Yep. They’re being robbed by the democratic party. Without union dues, the democratic party would have some very serious challenges.


16 posted on 06/29/2014 9:05:29 AM PDT by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: boycott

More than likely the woman had to quit her job to take care of her son or allow him to be institionalized at full government cost. Homecare is a LOT cheaper.


17 posted on 06/29/2014 9:16:53 AM PDT by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Talk about POTUS overreach, Kennedy created illegal Federal employee unions by EO. One of the biggest scams perpetrated on America. Public sector unions are illegal at all levels and must be dissolved.


18 posted on 06/29/2014 9:33:39 AM PDT by twister881
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

“Yes pictures of Roberts’ children’s fake adoption papers have been slipped under his door. He’ll vote with unions.”

I never saw those adoption papers. Can you post a copy here?


19 posted on 06/29/2014 9:53:10 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz ("Heck of a reset there, Hillary")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gunpowder green

She gets a state subsidy.


20 posted on 06/29/2014 10:01:41 AM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg; Lurking Libertarian; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; Salvation; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

21 posted on 06/29/2014 10:14:09 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rainee

“I’ve read that Scalia is the wild card..guess based on questions he was asking during oral arguments. Hoping they get this one right, public sector unions should be banned.”

Its not really the business of the Federal court to say this, but to take someone’s money or asset against their will is thief.

A any organization or individual, labor union or otherwise, that forces people to part with their money or just control of their property has in fact committed an act of theft.

If a labor union is to operate legitimately it must operate within the bounds of the free will and rights of its members.

A labor union thus could exist among the willing, just as it could act among those same willing’s power to act collectively. But they must never force employees to join them, nor must they ever force employers to act.

Their power must be based upon the employers choice of firing them all and starting from scratch or consenting to their demands.


22 posted on 06/29/2014 10:56:19 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

There should be no such thing as a public employee union.

Unions exist in order to provide an organization that can compete in size with the private companies that want to hire workers, so as to give workers some power to dictate better terms.

The union gets power from the government, since it is the government that enforces the rights of the unions.

So, the government is seen as the benevolent protector of the workers. Therefore, people working for the government are working for their own protector, and don’t need a union. If they don’t like how they are treated, they can also use the political process.

It would be like people working for a union wanting to unionize to protect themselves from the union.


23 posted on 06/29/2014 11:16:32 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

I don’t believe Scalia would have been for defining people as “public employees” for some purposes when they don’t qualify for any of the benefits that come from being a public employee.

I could see this case being decided very narrowly on those grounds, without actually getting rid of public unions or their forced dues.

Most people think the forced dues is the issue, but I think the court could simply rule on the definition of an “employee” instead.

That would be the easiest way to drag Scalia to the majority, if he otherwise was going to side with the union.

If Alito is writing the opinion (and circumstantial evidence suggests so since he hasn’t written any yet) it should be bad for the union at least partly, because Alito seemed clearly for the plaintiffs in the case. He wouldn’t get Hobby Lobby because it is too big a case, Roberts would want that one.


24 posted on 06/29/2014 11:20:26 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gunpowder green

There seems to be a new twist on social services whereby if you have a disabled family member, YOU can care for him/her and be paid. The cost is still substantially lower than paying for professional service, and it’s not financially disastrous to the family as it would be if a breadwinner had to quit a salaried job to care for the disabled.

Since that person receives a govt check (probably thru SSI), SEIU got into the act to extract ‘dues.’ Hopefully, they’re shut out tomorrow. Please, God!


25 posted on 06/29/2014 11:37:03 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Prayers up!


26 posted on 06/29/2014 1:04:16 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Harris v. Quinn case ...
also nicknamed the Jenny Grandmole law named after a Canadian cur bitch who was elected in Michgan to steal money from home care workers to fund her buddy turds in the Public sector unions.

Unions are about to be “blown away!”


27 posted on 06/29/2014 7:14:52 PM PDT by wetgundog (" Extremism in the Defense of Liberty is no Vice")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Money laundering.

A racketeering criminal enterprise.
.


28 posted on 06/29/2014 7:19:38 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson