National Right To Work Foundation
Recent News About National Right To Work Foundation
-
Judge: IL A/G's pro-union statements don't disqualify her from defending vs union lawsuit over fees
A federal judge has determined a state employee — notable for his public anti-union stances — can’t intervene on behalf of the state in a lawsuit it faces from a union leader asking courts to declare unions aren’t obligated to represent employees who refuse to pay membership dues. -
Anti-union IL state worker asks judge to let him defend state vs union attempt to 'discriminate' vs non-union workers
Saying Illinois’ attorney general’s defense is “inadequate” and is “bordering on malpractice,” an Illinois state employee who factored in the court action that led to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down rules requiring non-union workers to pay fees to unions has again jumped into a federal court action, this time asking a judge to allow his legal team to defend the state against a union’s attempt to secure a court order striking down labor laws requiring them to represent all workers in a collective bargaining unit. -
Lincolnshire: Taxes different from union dues; asks judge to toss union suit over 'anti-union' lobbying funds
Saying governments are different from labor unions and other private organizations, a north suburban village and an organization that lobbies on behalf of Illinois city and village governments has asked a federal judge to dismiss a union-backed lawsuit asserting the rights of union members are violated by local governments which use tax money to fund lobbyists to seek reforms opposed by unions. -
Union member sues Lincolnshire, says village can't support group that lobbied for Rauner reform agenda
As the U.S. Supreme Court prepared to hear arguments on the question of whether state rules requiring non-union workers pay fees to unions violate the Constitution, a union member in suburban Lincolnshire has sued his village government, demanding the court declare the rights of union members have been similarly violated by local governments which use taxpayer money to fund lobbyists to seek reforms opposed by unions. -
GOP state lawmakers join Supreme Court brief asking to reject challenge to compulsory union fees
A group of nine Republicans currently serving in the Illinois General Assembly, including two rookie state lawmakers, have signed their names to a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the court to uphold the state’s ability to allow unions to extract fees from government employees who don’t wish to join a union, arguing the country’s founding federalist principles should allow the 50 states to decide such policy questions for themselves. -
Supreme Court refuses to hear home care providers' lawsuit vs SEIU over compelled representation
The U.S. Supreme Court has denied a group of Illinois child care providers and in-home care assistants for those with disabilities the chance to argue their constitutional rights were violated by an Illinois state law forcing the care providers to accept the Service Employees International Union as their bargaining representative. -
SCOTUS expected to toss rules forcing non-union workers to pay fees; big political impacts possible
Sweeping changes in how unions collect dues and fees can be expected soon, now that the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear a case against Illinois' largest public sector employee union, two labor attorneys said during a recent interview. And such a decision also could have significant ramifications for the nation's politics. -
Appeals panel nixes home care workers' class action vs union over unconstitutional forced fee payment
Non-union home care providers who for years had fees, worth an estimated $32 million, illegally and unconstitutionally taken by the state of Illinois and funneled to a union should not be allowed to bring a class action against that union to get their money back, because courts can’t determine how many of those caregivers may have actually supported the union, a federal appeals court has ruled. -
SCOTUS to take up Illinois case challenging power of unions to collect fees from non-union state workers
The U.S. Supreme Court will again wade into the question of whether public sector worker unions can force government employees who don’t wish to join their union to still pay fees, ostensibly for collective bargaining representation, after the court on Sept. 28 agreed to hear arguments in the case of Janus v AFSCME. -
Home caregivers ask SCOTUS: Can IL force union representation?; Potential ramifications far-reaching
A group of Illinois child care providers and in-home care providers for those with disabilities have asked the nation’s highest court to step in to their dispute with a prominent labor union, arguing the state’s decision to force the care providers to allow the Service Employees International Union to serve as their bargaining representative as a condition of accepting payment through state assistance programs violates their constitutional rights. -
IL 'fair share fees' lawsuit tossed; plaintiffs say 'desired result,' allowing appeal to SCOTUS
The U.S. Supreme Court will get the chance to decide just how much public worker unions in Illinois and elsewhere can exact from non-union workers, after a federal appeals court in Chicago upheld a lower court’s dismissal of a lawsuit intended to challenge a longstanding legal precedent used by unions to justify the forcible collection of so-called “fair share” fees. -
Illinois can choose SEIU to represent all home caregivers in negotiations: Appeals court
The state of Illinois doesn’t trample on the rights of non-union home care providers by forcing them to abide by the terms of deals it strikes with a union over care provider pay rates and other terms of the care providers’ “employment,” a federal appeals court has ruled. -
Seventh Circuit hears arguments over IL 'fair share' union fees; case may be headed to SCOTUS
A challenge to the power of state worker labor unions to extract so-called “fair share” fees from non-union workers could be ticketed for the U.S. Supreme Court, where opponents of the fees hope a conservative-majority court could overturn a longstanding legal precedent used by unions to justify their forcible collection of fees from public employees who refuse to pay formal union dues.