Labor Related Articles
President Trump has nominated Democrat Mark Gaston Pearce for a third term to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Pearce has served for eight years on the board and has faced sharp criticism from Republicans and businesses during that time. His nomination came days after Bloomberg Law reported on negotiations which discussed Pearce’s nomination in exchange for Democrats agreeing to waive waiting periods and confirm specific pending nominations.
Read more about Pearce and his third term nomination here.
Each year, a home and health care waiver program through Medicaid provides billions of dollars to individuals with a disability, illness, or other chronic condition to aide them in paying for home health care services. Often, family members, friends, and local workers provide these services.
For years, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), has been collecting dues from these healthcare workers without their permission, even having them reclassified as state employees so they would be forced to pay into the union.
But these workers are not alone. Groups like MNCPA, a Minnesota coalition of personal care attendants, are fighting for their rights, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has introduced a proposed rule change to help end the practice of public funds being diverted to union coffers. They accepted public comments on this potential rule change through August 13.
To learn more about this “dues skimming” practice, read this article at Heartland.org.
In a blow to unions, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) general counsel Peter Robb has directed the agency’s lawyers not to object when a worker who has petitioned to decertify a union wants to intervene in an unfair labor practice case. In the past, unions have used these cases to slow down or halt a decertification process. Allowing employees to participate in the cases will give union opponents more power to fight against the unions.
Bloomberg Law discusses the details and implications of this decision (in an article where I’ve also been quoted) here.
The Janus ruling benefits public employees and now HHS is taken steps toward given home-care providers the same protections against unions. This is great news against for both state governments and the home-care providers that have unjustly unionized.
Learn more in the Wall Street Journal’s article (Subscription Required):
Public-sector unions have been gaming the political system for decades, bankrupting whole cities and plunging states into massive debt. How did this happen and can it be stopped? Akash Chougule, senior policy fellow for Americans for Prosperity, has the answers in this sobering video from Prager University.
In a 5-4 decision today, the Supreme Court delivered a decisive blow to unions by deeming forced fees illegal. Their decision in Janus v. AFSCME overturns the 1977 case Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, which had determined those fees legal since non-union employees benefitted from the union’s contract negotiations.
Janus, an employee at the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, had argued that the forced fees violated his First Amendment rights since those fees could be used for political funding.
“There is no doubt that this decision profoundly impacts whether public sector unions will exist in the future,” said Lauren Novak, a lawyer who has represented labor unions and employers. “Without the ability to collect fair share fees, many may not survive.”
Read more about the Supreme Court case and decision here.
Articles by the RWP Team
