The editors of the Chicago Tribune react to the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME:
We’re intrigued — and hopeful — about the implications of Janus v. AFSCME Council 31. If government workers don’t have to contribute, maybe this begins a reckoning for the political class of Illinois. We’re not great fans of that symbiosis between one party and the public’s workforce. Unions have a vested interest in the taxing-and-spending status quo in Illinois, which in fiscal terms is a disaster. Democrats have been too happy to go along for the ride, saddling taxpayers with enormous public debts. The results for this state and its economy are political gridlock and disappointment: Illinois has weak job growth, a bleak credit rating and a $130 billion hole in the state’s pension funds. Those are largely byproducts of the hand-holding between unions and Dems.
I don’t object to public employees receiving fair wages for their efforts. I do disagree with recycling union dues into political contributions which are then transmogrified into raises for public employees. Nearly everyone wants more money. There needs to be some way of limiting public employee wage demands to what the communities they purport to serve can afford to pay and right now in Illinois that is absent in the corrupt arrangement between public employee unions and elected officials.
According to an AFSME poll, 15% of employees will stop paying the fees, 35% of employees will continue, and the rest are “on the fence.” I wonder if they are “on the fence” because they are waiting for Rauner to be voted out of office?
You’re gonna get more wildcat strikes because of this, and a lot more disruption.
Unions are pretty much done for. Look for inequality to increase.
Steve
BTW, is this true?
Public-sector unions shouldn’t be allowed to make members pay union dues that are used for political lobbying. Reality: This has been illegal for 40 years. Anyone who wants to opt out of political activities is required to pay only a smaller “agency†fee, which is used to fund ordinary collective bargaining activities. Yesterday’s court case abolished even those. Workers can now enjoy the benefits of union representation without paying dues of any kind.
Steve
Money is fungible.
From the case: “Here, the nonmembers were told that they had to pay for “[l]obbying,†“[s]ocial and recreational activities,†“advertising,†“[m]embership meetings and conventions,†and
“litigation,†as well as other unspecified “[s]ervices†that
“may ultimately inure to the benefit of the members of the
local bargaining unit.†The total chargeable amount for nonmembers was 78.06% of full union dues.”