Michael Hayes, associate professor in the University of Baltimore School of Law, argues in an op-ed in The Daily Record that the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME District Council 31 case does not warrant overturning decades of precedence in labor law.
“The plaintiff in Janus is a government employee who … claims that requiring those who benefit from collective bargaining to pay for the services and representation they receive from unions somehow violates the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected this claim 41 years ago in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, and the precedent has stood ever since. But now, five justices could overrule that decision and disrupt the lives of millions of employees—as well as the taxpayers they serve—in 22 states and the District of Columbia.”
Prof. Hayes explains that unions, including those that represent public employees, are required to use dues only to pay for services provided to the employees they represent.
“[T]he idea that unions faithfully negotiate and carry out the desire of their members is not an idle assertion,” he says. “It’s one backed up by strong legal rules and protections.”
Read the op-ed in The Daily Record. (Subscription required.)
Learn more about Prof. Hayes.