High court seems skeptical of mandatory public union fees

Employment Law

The Supreme Court appears ready to deliver a major setback to American unions as it considers scrapping a four-decade precedent that lets public-sector labor organizations collect fees from workers who decline to join.

During more than an hour of oral arguments Monday, the high court's conservative justices seemed likely to side with a group of California teachers who say those mandatory fees violate the free-speech rights of workers who disagree with a union's positions.

Labor officials fear unions' very existence could be threatened if workers are allowed to get all the benefits of representation without at least paying fees to cover the costs of collective bargaining. The case affects more than 5 million workers in 23 states and Washington, D.C.


But Justice Anthony Kennedy rejected arguments by lawyers for the state of California and the California Teachers Association that the current fee system is needed to prevent non-members from becoming "free riders" — workers who reap the rewards of union bargaining and grievance procedures without paying for it.

"The union basically is making these teachers compelled riders for issues on which they strongly disagree," Kennedy said, noting the political nature of bargaining issues like teacher salaries, merit promotions and class size.

Related listings

  • DJ says taking Taylor Swift to court was only option

    DJ says taking Taylor Swift to court was only option

    Employment Law 08/23/2017

    The former radio host who lost a groping lawsuit to Taylor Swift in federal court this week said he realizes the case was in the pop star's favor, but he had no interest in backing down.David Mueller told The Associated Press on Tuesday that someone ...

  • Court revives black TV network's discrimination lawsuit

    Court revives black TV network's discrimination lawsuit

    Employment Law 05/13/2017

    A federal appeals court has revived a lawsuit claiming that a North Carolina city discriminated against an African-American-owned television network. A divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday reversed a lower cour...

  • Kansas Chief Justice Pitches Lawmakers on Court Pay Hikes

    Kansas Chief Justice Pitches Lawmakers on Court Pay Hikes

    Employment Law 03/23/2017

    Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice Lawton Nuss is trying to persuade legislators to increase salaries for judges and pay for judicial branch employees. Nuss devoted much of his annual State of the Judiciary address Wednesday to what he described as t...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

Canton, MI Criminal Law Attorney Rita White is a metro Detroit area attorney with a focus on criminal defense. >> read
New Rochelle Car Accidents Attorneys At Kommer Bave & Ollman LLP are specializing in personal injury claims. >> read