The Supreme court ruling Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees might not have received the same media coverage as something like say, what Donald Trump serves for meals…
But noted or not, all the same, the implications of the landmark case have been far reaching indeed as public sector unions are finally forced to relinquish their grasp on the hundreds of thousands of unwilling members whose wages they’d been garnishing under federal protection for years. Reason reports,
Special AlertAre you a proud supporter of President Trump? If so, you'll LOVE this President Donald Trump Collectable Coin. This unique keepsake is a great way to honor the Presidency of the man devoted to "Make America Great Again!"
“Given the choice of no longer paying to support unions they didn’t want to join in the first place, lots of public sector workers took it.
Two of the largest public sector unions in the country lost more than 210,000 so-called “agency fee members” in the wake of last year’s Supreme Court ruling that said unions could no longer force non-members to pay partial dues. That case, Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, effectively freed public workers from having to make “fair share” payments—usually totaling about 70 to 80 percent of full union dues—in lieu of joining a union as a full-fledged member.
Now, annual reports filed with the federal Department of Labor show that the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) lost 98 percent of its agency fee-paying members during the past year. Another large public sector union, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), lost 94 percent of their agency fee-paying members.”
Freedom is the Best Policy
The Janus case might not have meant much if you’re one of the majority of Americans who find themselves in the private sector but for workers across the country serving state, local, and the federal governments it’s finally given them the right to decline union membership.
Prior to the ruling people who had no desire to partake in the various public workers’ unions were still strong-armed into handing over the majority of a willing member’s dues by litigation.
Aside from being an obvious scam and affront to worker’s rights (ironically what unions presume to safeguard), this was beginning to manifest politically as unions funding pro-union politicians to endorse pro-union litigation was becoming a vicious cycle with obvious results.
Now with Janus on the table, not being able to rob the paychecks of non-members will likely dent the bottom lines of unions all too often apt to use them for lobbying. Compared to 2017, AFSCME reported a $4.2 million drop in revenue from fees and dues in 2018.
And better yet – for the pro-union crowd – the voluntary membership of those same unions hasn’t declined much if at all over the same time span. Foreseeing membership crumbling like a house of cards in the wake of a feared tragedy of the commons was the hallmark of Union resistance in the case.
With that clearly not manifesting it’s clear the Supreme Court correctly determined the unions were merely trying to maintain the stranglehold on roughly half a million unwilling fundraisers. In the wake of the Janus ruling that stranglehold has been decisively ended in a win-win for everyone but AFSCME executives.
Thankfully and for once, Freedom won this round.
Editor’s note: Its amazing the loss of revenue within a very short period of the ruling. Kind of makes you think people didn’t really WANT to belong to these formerly compulsory organizations.