Service Employees International Union
Labor Unions |
Public State & Local Government
1800 Massachusetts Avenue Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036
Recent News About Service Employees International Union
-
Federal panel agrees the Service Employees International Union office had justification for imposing trusteeship at Chicago-area Local 73, enough to justify ousting longtime local leaders who had dissented from the parent organization's endorsement of Hillary Clinton for U.S. president in 2016
-
A Chicago federal judge has ruled the ousted president and vice president of the Chicago-based Service Employees International Union local, can press their suit against the umbrella organization for improperly expelling them allegedly for disagreeing over union affairs, but cannot seek reinstatement, only damages.
-
Labor unions representing public employees shouldn’t need to refund fees they unconstitutionally collected from non-union employees, because they were acting in “good faith,” relying on state laws and prior legal precedent, a federal judge has ruled.
-
A federal appeals panel in Chicago has rejected the request by a group of home caregivers for a new hearing to reconsider the courts’ prior decisions denying them the opportunity to bring a class action to recover nearly $32 million they accuse a union of unconstitutionally taking from them under a state law invalidated by a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
-
A federal appeals panel in Chicago has again rejected an attempt by a group of home caregivers to bring a class action lawsuit against the labor union they say used an Illinois state law to unconstitutionally grab $32 million in fees from their pay, as the judges said the decision holds up even when reevaluated in light of a recent Supreme Court decision further restricting unions’ abilities to force non-union public workers to pay such fees.
-
A day after overturning the legal precedent that allowed public sector unions to use the state to grab a share of non-union workers’ paychecks, the U.S. Supreme Court has ordered a federal appeals court in Chicago to use its ruling to take another look at his decision forbidding a group of home caregivers from suing a labor union to claw back some of the $32 million in similar fees the state had taken from the caregivers and paid to the union.
-
The Trump administration may push back—if it can—an Obama-era National Labor Relations Board decision that gave U.S. college and university graduate student workers the right to organize, which has been embraced by major unions.
-
Saying a union’s unconstitutional seizure of $32 million in fees from non-union home care providers via the state of Illinois was legally not much different than picking a pocket on the street, a group of those personal assistants have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and overturn lower courts’ decisions allowing the union to keep the money, even the high court had determined the union had no right to collect the money in the first place.
-
Members of an influential local union are asking a federal judge to restore local control a year after the national union appointed a trustee to bring order amid a messy leadership spat.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Illinois-based home child care providers who paid "fair share" fees for almost nine years to a union they did not support will not get that money back following a lawsuit, after a federal judge who heard their case rejected the plaintiffs' argument the arrangement violated their constitutional rights and said the union can keep the money because it collected the money in "good faith."
-
Illinois home-based child care providers who refused to join a union designated by the state of Illinois to represent them, yet were compelled by the state for years to pay so-called “fair share” fees to that union to negotiate on their behalf, should not be able to force the union to pay them their money back, even after the state government and union agreed the law that forced them to pay the fair share fees should be considered unconstitutional, a federal judge has ruled.
