The suit argues the union is acting in defiance of the Supreme Court’s 2018 Janus v. AFSCME ruling, which strictly limited the ability of public sector unions to coerce dues payments from workers who don’t wish to join a union.
A group of Maryland state employees has filed a federal lawsuit against their labor union to recoup union fees the U.S. Supreme Court found to be illegal in a ruling last year.
In a class-action lawsuit filed Wednesday in Baltimore against the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the 19 state employees are seeking a refund of fees they say they were forced to pay before the Supreme Court’s decision.
The U.S. Supreme Court says it is illegal to require public employees to pay union fees as a condition of employment. Now, a group of Maryland state employees who were forced to pay these fees prior to the Court’s decision is demanding a refund.
Today, 19 Maryland state employees filed a federal class-action lawsuit against AFSCME Council 3, demanding the union return money taken from their paychecks for union “agency” or “fair share” fees before the Court’s June 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME. If successful, these workers and nearly 10,000 other state employees could recoup up to $7 million that the union took from them.
Employees can’t be forced to pay a union to work in public service, and the state can’t withhold information from employees about their constitutional rights. That’s what two University of California employees argue in a lawsuit filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against state officials and Teamsters Local 2010.
When the young man came by her office last spring, Cara O’Callaghan thought he was one of the students she sees regularly in the recreation
NEW YORK (July 23, 2019) – A class action lawsuit filed against New York City’s largest municipal union is demanding millions of dollars in illegal
A school employee in Illinois filed a federal lawsuit against a local school district and the state’s largest public sector union, claiming both refused to stop deducting union dues from her paycheck months after she left the union.
Tommy Few, a special education teacher at Sepulveda Middle School in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley, filed suit late last year against the United Teachers of Los Angeles – along with the Los Angeles Unified School District and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra – claiming his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and association were violated when he tried to leave the UTLA following last summer’s Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME.
“When I found out that I didn’t have to be in the union and have those dues deducted from my paycheck every month, I wanted out,” Few told Fox News. “But they tried to tell me that I could only leave during their opt-out window and that I still had to pay the dues.”
CLEVELAND, Ohio — Three Kent State University workers sued the university and a labor union Monday, saying the university continues to deduct dues from their paychecks even though they withdrew from the labor organization following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year.
A massive class-action lawsuit filed in Illinois on Wednesday could force unions to refund hundreds of millions of dollars in agency fees paid by thousands of workers nationwide prior to the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling last year in Janus v. AFSCME.
Prior to Janus, Hughes argued, workers were faced with a “false choice” — they could pay full membership dues and become a union member, or pay a substantial amount of those dues and not become a member. The Supreme Court validated Hughes’ reasoning last June, holding not only that public unions violated the First Amendment by taking money out of unwilling workers’ paychecks to fund collective bargaining, but also that employees must “clearly and affirmatively consent” before any fees or dues are collected.
StandWithWorkers.org is operated by the Liberty Justice Center. There is a lot of misinformation surrounding the Janus decision. StandWithWorkers.org serves as an educational resource to help government workers understand their options.
This website (the “Site”) is provided for informational purposes only. The information and materials contained herein are not intended to and do not constitute legal advice or the formation of an attorney-client relationship. Although the information on this Site relates to legal issues, no attorney-client relationship is created between you and the Liberty Justice Center and/or its employees when you use the Site or its materials. The information provided on this Site may not apply to your particular facts or circumstances; accordingly, you should seek legal counsel from a licensed attorney concerning your particular issues. Please be advised that if you submit information to us via this Site, no attorney-client relationship is created, and any such communications are not considered confidential.
© 2024 Liberty Justice Center, All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy
