In Harris v. Quinn (2014), the Supreme Court struck down mandatory
union fee for private home-health workers, including employees who are paid
wages by a state subsidy. This was a big win for opponents of unions.
An anti-union group, Right to Work Foundation, filed a follow-up lawsuit in Riffey et al. v.
Rauner et al., case number 1:10-cv-02477, in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois. The decision is here.
In the new lawsuit, union-fee challengers seek $32
million in fees taken by the union from 80,000 home health care workers since
2008.
Notice that Gov. Rauner is a defendant, along with the union
(SEIU). But this is a case he wants to lose in order to withhold or collect money from the union.
The problem, according to federal judge Manish Shah, is that
65% of the workers have voluntarily joined the union and consented to pay dues.
The lawsuit seeks refunds for this 65% class, and the other 35%. The union has
stopped collecting dues from the non-members, but refuses to refund dues for
the period 2008-2014.
On June 7th, Judge Shah dismissed a motion to allow the
non-members to represent the entire class.
The judge explained that the plaintiffs
do not meet the legal definition of “typicality”— in other words, the
minority-plaintiffs cannot use a class action to impose their will on the
majority.
No comments:
Post a Comment