Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is brutal news for public sector unions, tends to oppose earlier precedent andd I will be interested to see in particular Scalia had voted since he had supported union dues in previous cases.
Maybe because non-members also get to enjoy the benefits, therefore they should be paying their "fair share"?
In a private sense, I agree with you, as far as public sector unions which see both sides essentially aligned against the taxpayer...I am more hesitant.
Does this make the right to work debate a mute point - if a person can not be forced to pay union dues?
No because the decision was not so broad. It wont apply to most public workers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
supreme court rules against unions.
