"Curbs On Unions Likely To Starve Activist Groups" -- that's the lead headline (top right of page A1) in today's print edition of the New York Times. In the online edition, it's "Supreme Court Labor Decision Wasn't Just a Loss for Unions." The gist of the article is that this right-wing Supreme Court is now going after our friends to de-fund them. To Pravda, that seems to be a big problem. To me, it seems like there's a rather gigantic scandal going on here that has nothing to do with what Pravda thinks is the scandal.
The Times's article discusses the effects of the Supreme Court's decision last week in the case called Janus v. AFSCME. That's the case that invalidated so-called "fair share" payments, which are the payments that many state and local governments have required their employees to make to labor unions, even if a given employee declines to join the union. Henceforth, under the majority opinion in Janus by Justice Alito, if a government employee does not want to join a labor union, he does not have to pay the union anything as a condition of keeping his job.
OK, but how exactly is this going to "starve activist groups"? After all, prior to this decision, didn't non-members of the union already have the right to decline to contribute to the union's political activities, and to limit their payments to the portion of union dues that supports collective bargaining activities?Read More