Supreme Court Delivers Blow To Unions
The Supreme Court handed down its decision in Harris v. Quinn on Monday, saying partial public employees can't be required to contribute to unions.
According to SCOTUSblog, the 5-4 ruling is a "substantial obstacle to expanding public employee unions, but it does not gut them." SCOTUSblog also notes the case does not involve "full-fledge public employees," but rather says that union bargaining fees cannot be imposed on employees that are not full public employees.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion in the ruling.
READ THE WHOLE STORY
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/s...
According to SCOTUSblog, the 5-4 ruling is a "substantial obstacle to expanding public employee unions, but it does not gut them." SCOTUSblog also notes the case does not involve "full-fledge public employees," but rather says that union bargaining fees cannot be imposed on employees that are not full public employees.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion in the ruling.
READ THE WHOLE STORY
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/s...
/*
I've been a Union Man for a great many years and I do understand why a 'part-time' employee should not be required to pay into a union...but they don't get the protection as a full time worker does; none of the bennies either. It's amazing how most of the American work force are 'part-time employees...the employers don't have to offer bennies - pretty slick huh?
Good post. Thanks Jen!
Peace and Love,
Greg.
*/