Unions still defying SCOTUS, refusing to let members resign

[rangerrebew]

Unions still defying SCOTUS, refusing to let members resign

Jazz ShawPosted at 2:11 pm on November 20, 2018

After the Supreme Court decision in Janus v AFSCME it seemed as if the new rules were clear. Labor unions, particularly in the public sector, were not supposed to be able to forcibly collect dues from non-members and couldn’t make union membership a condition for employment. But not every union has gotten the message. Or more to the point, they know full well that they aren’t allowed to do this but are looking for loopholes to get around the ruling.

That appears to be the case with the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 13 in Pennsylvania. After the Janus decision was handed down, at least one of their members turned in his resignation from the union. Easy as pie, right? Well… it turns out that it’s not. The union said they received his request but they weren’t going to accept it. (Free Beacon)

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/11/20/unions-still-defying-scotus-refusing-let-members-resign/

[Fishrrman]

Time for the administration to step in and enforce the Supreme Court decision.

What are the democrat-communists going to say to them for doing so...?

[Slide Rule]

The President could freeze the union financial accounts,
and distribute payments for anyone with a union claim.

:)

[LMAO]

Human nature

No entity gives up power easily

[LMAO]

Time for the administration to step in and enforce the Supreme Court decision.

What are the democrat-communists going to say to them for doing so...?

How?

[truth_seeker]

The state of Pennsylvania has a basis for action.

In case you missed it, public employee unions are one of the biggest funding sources, for elections at all levels.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I thought employees are paid by the company they work for, not the union.

Otherwise, how is the union extracting pay from an employee?

[Fishrrman]

I wrote:
"Time for the administration to step in and enforce the Supreme Court decision."

and LMAO replied:
"How?"

OK, how's this for starters:
The labor department could decertify any union that has been proven to evading compliance with the Janus decision.

That would force them to hold a new election to "re-certify" themselves as the collective bargaining agent for their membership.

And... just maybe... the membership might vote "no"...?

[Cyber Liberty]

I thought employees are paid by the company they work for, not the union.

Otherwise, how is the union extracting pay from an employee?

Forced payroll deduction.  Fact of life in non-Right to Work states.

[Cyber Liberty]

The Unions understand something almost every President has not:  "They made the Ruling, now let them enforce it."

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Forced payroll deduction.  Fact of life in non-Right to Work states.

Forced by who?

Whoever is responsible for the payroll or the state is the culprit then. @Cyber Liberty

[Cyber Liberty]

Forced by who?

Whoever is responsible for the payroll or the state is the culprit then. @Cyber Liberty

It's in the Union contract with the Employer, who has to sign on to it in order to do business in the State.  I'd put the blame for that upon the State.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

It's in the Union contract with the Employer, who has to sign on to it in order to do business in the State.  I'd put the blame for that upon the State.

Then the State, not the Union, is defying the Supreme Court ruling in that situation.

[Cyber Liberty]

Then the State, not the Union, is defying the Supreme Court ruling in that situation.

You make an interesting point I cannot answer. Who, exactly, is tasked with enforcing Janus?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You make an interesting point I cannot answer. Who, exactly, is tasked with enforcing Janus?

Well, the state is violating the Constitution if it enforces a rule that has been declared unconstitutional.

As far as enforcing the court's judgement against a state, that is difficult.

Basically, the reference I found says it can request the Executive to supply the military or other power to enforce the judgement.  If the President refuses, the court is powerless.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1063536?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

What I find ironic in this is that there have been a number of questionable rulings against the current Executive in executing its Executive authority, yet the President has not simply ignored these as best as I can recall, although it would seem he certainly has the power to do so by simply declaring he is upholding his sworn oath to uphold the Constitution by its vested Executive authority it conveys.

[sneakypete]

I thought employees are paid by the company they work for, not the union.

Otherwise, how is the union extracting pay from an employee?

@IsailedawayfromFR

Traditionally it happens automatically because the union makes sure every job opening is filled by a relative that wants to join the union,and then union dues are automatically taken out of the paycheck before the employee gets it.

In other jobs,like the US Post Office,you don't have to join a union,but if you don't the union won't represent you if you are being treated unfairly,and generally speaking,they will take the side of the company if you hire your own lawyer and sue. Also,if you are NOT a union member on a union job,management will pick on you because you are the only one they can pick on without facing problems themselves.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

@IsailedawayfromFR

Traditionally it happens automatically because the union makes sure every job opening is filled by a relative that wants to join the union,and then union dues are automatically taken out of the paycheck before the employee gets it.

In other jobs,like the US Post Office,you don't have to join a union,but if you don't the union won't represent you if you are being treated unfairly,and generally speaking,they will take the side of the company if you hire your own lawyer and sue. Also,if you are NOT a union member on a union job,management will pick on you because you are the only one they can pick on without facing problems themselves.

The point remains that the union is not the paymaster.  Whoever is the one cutting checks is at fault here, regardless of whatever the union wishes.