7 Things to Know About the Supreme Court Decision That Just Slammed Teachers' Unions
The U.S. Supreme Court just dealt teachers' unions a heavy blow with a decision in the Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Council 31 case. Here's what you need to know:
1. The justices ruled to prohibit unions from charging nonmembers "agency" or "fair share" fees. Up until today, teachers' unions and other public-employee unions charged fees to employees who chose not to join the union but were still represented in collective bargaining. The union's argument for the fees was that nonmembers are still benefitting from collective bargaining, so they should have to pay something. The justices ruled that forcing employees to pay fees to a union they don't support is a violation of their First Amendment rights.
2. The justices also ruled that unions cannot deduct fees from employees' paychecks without their express consent. This part of the decision goes beyond what most court watchers were expecting, and it deepens the blow to unions. In some states, teachers have just a limited window of time in which they can tell their union they want to drop their membership. That rule would have been challenged in court had the Janusdecision not addressed it. But now, teachers will have to affirmatively opt into paying dues to the union.
3. The ruling was 5-4. Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote the majority opinion. He was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Neil M. Gorsuch. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the dissent and was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor.
4. Just about half the country will be affected by the Supreme Court decision. Here are the 22 states that allow unions to charge agency fees to nonmembers:
5. Teachers' unions are predicting sizeable membership losses. The National Education Association has projected a two-year loss of 307,000 members, which led officials to propose a $50 million budget cut (a 13 percent reduction from the current budget.) The American Federation of Teachers has declined to release its projections, but President Randi Weingarten has said it will be a "bumpy ride" for unions—but "not an existential threat" thanks to planning. It's worth noting that the percentage of public school teachers participating in unions has been declining steadily over the last two decades.
6. Unions will be taking their fight to the state legislatures. Already, Democratic lawmakers in about a half-dozen states have introduced or passed legislation that seeks to protect unions from the Supreme Court decision. For example, several states have enacted laws that require schools to allow teachers' unions to meet with new teachers, so labor representatives can pitch the unions' services. Other states, like New York, have specified what services unions are obligated to provide (or not provide) to nonmembers.
Now that the Supreme Court decision is out, we can expect more union-friendly bills to be proposed.
7. This ruling could make unions more responsive to their members. At least one analysis showed that when state unions lose the right to collect agency fees, representatives tend to do more outreach to teachers to convince them to join. Katharine Strunk, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University, said unions might now shift their policy priorities to better reflect what their members want.
Teachers' unions have been working for the past year to engage their members and urge them to recommit. In an interview, California Teachers Association President Eric Heins said he plans to step up the union's efforts to reach out to nonmembers and connect with their values in the wake of the Janus ruling. "When you talk about values, ... that really transcends political lines and political ideology," he said.
Heins added that CTA will try to fight against what he expects to be an organized campaign to convince members to drop out of the union."Our work is very relational, it's all about our relationships [with members]," he said.
Check out our longer story on the ruling as well as all of Education Week's coverage leading up to the Janus decision. And stand by for continued updates as more analysis and reactions roll in.
This article was originally published in Education Week.
supreme court issues major blow to teachers unions in 5-4 janus decision
In a blow to organized labor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that government workers who choose not to join a union cannot be charged for the cost of collective bargaining.
The vote was a predictable 5-to-4 margin. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion with the court's conservatives joining him.
"Under Illinois law, public employees are forced to subsidize a union, even if they choose not to join and strongly object to the positions the union takes in collective bargaining and related activities," Alito wrote. "We conclude that this arrangement violates the free speech rights of nonmembers by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern."
The decision reverses a four-decades-old precedent and upends laws in 22 states. It also comes on the last day of this Supreme Court term, the period on the final sentence of a chapter that began with the appointment of conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch and saw conservative wins in decision after decision. This term was also an affirmation of the risky political gambit played by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who denied even a confirmation hearing for Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama's pick for the court after Justice Antonin Scalia died.
The plaintiff in this case, Mark Janus, a child-support specialist for the state of Illinois, challenged a requirement that government workers who opt out of a union still have to pay partial dues to cover the union's cost of negotiation and other functions.
In 1977, the Supreme Court had drawn a distinction between such mandatory "agency fees" and other, voluntary union dues, which might be used for lobbying or other political activity. Wednesday's decision erases that distinction. The court's conservative wing found that negotiations by public sector unions are inherently political and nonmembers cannot be compelled to pay for them.
The high court heard a similar case in 2016, but deadlocked 4 to 4 after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, giving public sector unions a two-year reprieve.
While the Obama administration sided with the union in that earlier case, the Trump administration backed Janus and his fellow union holdouts.
Wednesday's ruling is a victory for conservative activists who have been waging a multipronged battle against organized labor — and a potentially crippling blow for public sector unions.
"This case is yet another example of corporate interests using their power and influence to launch a political attack on working people and rig the rules of the economy in their own favor," Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, said in a statement when the case reached the high court.
Government workers have been a relative stronghold in an otherwise shrinking labor movement. More than a third of the public sector workforce is unionized, compared with less than 7 percent in the private sector.
A survey by the AFSCME — the union Janus would have to pay into — found that if agency fees were no longer mandatory, 15 percent of employees would stop paying them while 35 percent would continue to pay. The balance of workers were "on the fence."
GNTA 2018-2019 CALENDAR - REVISED!
ASSEMBLY BILL A.10475 Introduced to fix appr law and remove reliance on standardized tests
On 4/26, the New York State Assembly leaders introduced Assembly bill A.10475, which would fix the flawed annual professional performance review law. Now we need the Senate to act too!
Everything about the current system has angered and frustrated educators, parents and students. The misuse of standardized tests and the state's over-reliance on testing have plagued the learning climate in our classrooms for years. There are far better ways to evaluate educators than to use mystery math and algorithms that spit out invalid "growth scores" while subjecting kids to exhausting tests that neither inform instruction nor accurately measure achievement.
Go to the Member Action Center to tell your state Senator to pass Assembly bill A.10475 to finally fix New York's broken teacher evaluation system!
This new legislation would Let Educators Teach and Let Students Learn! School districts and their unions would be able to design their own fair and effective evaluations systems that help teachers grow professionally while meeting the unique needs of their own communities.
Urge lawmakers to listen to parents and educators and pass this bill to ensure students and teachers are valued as more than a test score. Tell them they must reduce the testing burden and enact this fairer evaluation system before the end of this legislative session.
GNTA open house
Great Neck Teachers Association
NYSUT, AFT, AFL-CIO #2686
The Cottage • 343 Lakeville Road
Great Neck, NY 11020
email@example.com • @GNTeachers
(516) 829-9070 • Fax: (516) 829-0724
DID YOU KNOW...
You can get forms for dental, excess medical, prescription drug and other claims by clicking on the INFORMATION menu at the top of this page and then clicking on the "Forms" link?
WHOM CAN I CONTACT IF I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT...
GNTA Benefits (excess medical, dental, optical, etc.)
Monica Martin at The Cottage
The Contract, APPR, or My Professional Rights & Responsibilities
Your building’s BRC Chairperson
My Learning Plan or Professional Development
Your building’s BCG Chairperson
Jennifer Kirby, Director of Human Resources