(bolding mine)
AFAICT, this did not happen to you and the laws you claim exist do not.
It looks like you’re right – they didn’t overrule Abood; they just distinguished it from PAs.
Basically, some states wrote laws that count a broad swath of home healthcare workers as public sector employees, because mumble mumble.
The public employee unions got to count these people as members & deduct money from their paychecks.
Needles to say, some of these workers were not happy with this, and the Supreme Court correctly declared “This is a huge steaming pile of bullshit! Cut it out!”
Scared me for a minute there Bricker. I counted the “for” and “against” and got 5 to 5. I counted again, and still 5 to 5. Then I looked at the names and realized Breyer voted twice the cheat.
Obama’s version of court-packing. 
It took me ten very pre-coffee minutes to figure that out this morning.
Who’s hiding Ruken’s coffee? 
Ugh.
I had mixed feelings about the other decision (Hobby Lobby) but I’m thoroughly against this one.
Bricker on what grounds do you feel further weakening labor unions in America is a good thing?
On the grounds that forcing someone to pay for membership in a union they don’t wish to belong to runs counter to our fundamental notions of fairness.
Not only that, but the First Amendment guarantees us, inter alia, freedom of association; when the government forces a person to pay union fees when the person does not wish to be a part of the union, this violates the First Amendment right of association.
I couldn’t make another myself because it would have taken away a Good Union Job.
A much more highly desirable situation than any possible alternative.
Say that to the best 15% of workers in unionized industries. They get held back by the lesser co-workers because the incentives of union labor are perverse. Actual acumen in one’s profession is not duly rewarded.
That being said, voluntary unionization is vital to a functioning democracy, as the leadership is in fact accountable to its members.
Whose notion of fairness? It doesn’t run contrary to mine.
I don’t see why paying union fees is inherently different than paying taxes. Can I get out of paying my taxes because I don’t approve of our foreign policy?
For the record, Bricker you’re a Catholic right? Catholic social teaching strongly favours labour unions as a bulwark both against capitalists and against the state, last I checked.
what’s conducive to the common good, isn’t always conducive to the self-interest of every individual person.
And even in heavily unionized industries, unionized workers can and do get fired all the time. It’s not as easy as it would be if unions didn’t exist (and it shouldn’t be), but it’s false to say that doing your job well isn’t rewarded.
Because a union isn’t a fucking government. A union is merely an extension of your right to freely associate, and as such should not be granted extraordinary rights unavailable to any individual member. You do not have the legal right to shake down your co-workers for money, so neither should you and your mates working together.
All unions have internal elections.
I have not kept up with this thread but this article is recent and seems to bear on this topic so:
And the people elected have no power to change anything. Especially not dues. But boy howdy, I sure do love that pen you gave me with the union logo on it. It worked for two whole days before the click part broke.
That may be true, but it’s not on point.
Stringbean was referencing voluntary unionization. The PAs in this case did not voluntarily unionize - they were made a part of the union for the purposes of agency fees by executive order.
Why the RW hostility to labor unions anyway? After all, collective bargaining is just another form of negotiation-in-the-marketplace.