During the Janus oral arguments Feb. 26, a few Supreme Court Justices expressed concerns that ending the ability of public-employee unions to operate closed shops, where they can require the payment of the equivalent of dues from nonmembers, could have chaotic consequences for the 22 states, Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico where that has been the law for decades.
The U.S. Solicitor General, Noel J. Francisco, arguing against the unions’ position, attempted to allay those concerns by citing the successful existence of Federal Government unions. These unions exist in an “open-shop” environment where they can’t compel employees in their bargaining units to pay dues or agency fees, but are still required to represent everyone.
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you have an active digital subscription, then you already have an account here. Just reset your password, if you've not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
If you are a current print-only subscriber, and want access to our website,click here to view your options for changing you subscription level.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |