Union Station: February 22, 2019

Get Union Station: Ballotpedia's weekly deep dive on public-sector union policy

Email *

First Name

Please complete the Captcha above

Welcome to Union Station, our weekly newsletter that keeps you abreast of the legislation, national trends, and public debate surrounding public-sector union policy. This week, we take a closer look at a recently settled lawsuit involving the Michigan Education Association’s (MEA) attempt to collect membership dues from two members who left the union in 2013.

## Contents

* 1 MEA settles class action lawsuit, will stop seeking dues from employees who left the union
* 2 The big picture
* 2.1 Number of relevant bills by state
* 2.2 Number of relevant bills by current legislative status
* 2.3 Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s)
* 3 Recent legislative actions
* 4 See also

## MEA settles class action lawsuit, will stop seeking dues from employees who left the union[edit]

In a settlement signed Jan. 30, the Michigan Education Association (MEA) agreed to recognize that two Port Huron Area School District employees resigned from the union and will stop seeking to collect union membership dues from them. The MEA also agreed to stop seeking dues from others who resigned from the union after March 28, 2013, when Michigan's right to work law took effect. (Sources: National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and Times Herald)

* Who are the parties to the suit? Who were the parties to the suit? The plaintiffs were Linda Gervais and Tammy Williams, former employees of the Port Huron Area School District. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation represented them. The defendant was the Michigan Education Association.
* What is at issue? Gervais and Williams left the MEA in 2013. The MEA asked both to pay dues and fees that accrued between their resignations from the union and their retirement from the Port Huron Area School District. Gervais and Williams said they were not required to pay the dues because they were not members of the union. The MEA agreed to stop asking Gervais, Williams, and others who resigned from the MEA in 2013 to pay dues.
* What are the parties to the suit saying?
* National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix said, “This is a great example for other workers who are victims of Big Labor’s coercive tactics. As the union bosses’ attempt to counteract Michigan’s Right to Work law demonstrates, although union membership and financial support is voluntary under the law, that doesn’t mean Big Labor will obey that law. Thankfully, armed with the Foundation-won Janus Supreme Court decision, Linda and Tammy successfully halted this multi-year campaign of illegal dues demands for themselves and countless other educators.”
* Michigan Education Association Director of Public Affairs Doug Pratt said, “MEA has reached a settlement in a lawsuit brought by the National Right to Work Legal Foundation and several former MEA members. The agreement clears debt incurred by individuals who attempted to opt out of membership after the so-called 'right-to-work' law took effect in Michigan, but did so outside the time period allowed by MEA’s rules, which were legal at the time. This settlement is about fairness for both MEA members and non-members alike. For individuals who chose not to be MEA members, it simply eliminates debt they incurred under an old set of opt-out rules that no longer apply. For those who want to belong to MEA, it stops groups like National Right to Work from harassing our organization. It stops the diversion of attention and resources away from our members’ collective efforts to ensure quality education for Michigan students and quality working environments for Michigan school employees.”

## The big picture[edit]

### Number of relevant bills by state[edit]

So far this year we have tracked 72 pieces of legislation dealing with public-sector employee union policy. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we're tracking. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we're tracking.

### Number of relevant bills by current legislative status[edit]

### Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s)[edit]

## Recent legislative actions[edit]

Below is a complete list of legislative actions on relevant bills since the beginning of the year. Bills are listed in alphabetical order, first by state and then by bill number.

* California AB314: An act to amend existing government codes relating to public employment.
* Assembly Public Employment And Retirement hearing occurred Feb. 20.
* Connecticut HB05637: This bill would require state and municipal collective bargaining agreements to include statements notifying employees of their right to opt out of union membership.
* Labor and Public Employees Public hearing scheduled for Feb. 21.
* Connecticut HB06930: This bill would require public employers to provide unions with access to new employee orientations.
* Labor and Public Employees Public hearing scheduled for Feb. 21.
* Florida H0013: This bill would prohibit collective bargaining agreements that require public-sector employers to compensate for union activities.
* Filed Feb. 18.
* Illinois HB2113: This bill would remove language from state statutes requiring public who are not union members to pay agency fees. It would also authorize employees to bargain independently with employers.
* Assigned to Labor & Commerce Committee Feb. 19.
* Maine LD900: This bill authorizes certain classes of public-sector employees to strike.
* Referred to the Committee on Labor and Housing in concurrence Feb. 19.
* Maryland HB766: This bill would establish collective bargaining rights for community college employees.
* House hearing scheduled for March 1.
* Maryland HB1143: This bill would establish collective bargaining rights for tenured and tenure-track faculty, graduate students, and adjunct faculty at select public institutions.
* House hearing scheduled for March 1.
* Maryland SB587: This bill would exempt unions from representing non-members in grievance or contractual proceedings.
* Senate hearing scheduled for March 7.
* Montana HB323: This bill would prohibit employers from requiring employees to become or remain union members as a condition of employment. It would also disallow payroll deductions for non-member fees paid to unions.
* Business, Labor, and Economic Affairs Committee hearing canceled Feb. 16.
* New Hampshire HB363: This bill would establish the state Legislature as a public employer under the state's public-employer labor relations laws.
* Retained in committee Feb. 20.
* New Hampshire HB622: This bill would expand the definition of unfair labor practices as they relate to the interaction of public employers and state contractors with labor unions.
* Dead on Feb. 20.
* Oregon HB3009: This bill would require public employers to provide unions with access to new employees. It would also permit individuals who are not union members to make payments in lieu of dues to unions.
* Referred to Speaker’s desk Feb. 20.
* Washington HB1575: This bill would declare public employers and public-sector unions are not liable for claims involving agency fees paid to unions before Janus.
* Majority recommended that amended bill be passed Feb. 18. Minority recommended that bill not be passed Feb. 18.
* Washington HB2017: This bill would establish collective bargaining rights for administrative law judges.
* Executive action taken in the House Committee on Labor & Workplace Standards Feb. 19.
* Washington SB5169: This bill would expand the definition of unfair labor practices as they relate to the interaction of public employers and state contractors with labor unions.
* Senate Committee on Labor & Commerce public hearing scheduled for Feb. 21.
* Washington SB5623: This bill would declare public employers and public-sector unions are not liable for claims involving agency fees paid to unions before Janus.
* Executive action taken in the Senate Committee on Labor & Commerce Feb. 20.

## See also[edit]

* Public sector union policy in the United States

v • e

Ballotpedia coverage by project

Federal|

U.S. President • Executive Branch • Legislative Branch • U.S. Senate • U.S. House • Judicial Branch • SCOTUS

State|

State Executive Officials • State Legislatures • State Courts • State Ballot Measures • Recalls

Local|

Municipal Government • School Boards • Local Courts • Local Ballot Measures • Recalls

Policy|

Administrative State • Budgets • Civil liberties • Education • Elections • Energy • Environment • Finance • Healthcare • Immigration • Pensions

News|

The Daily Brew • Ballotpedia's Polling Indexes • Scott Rasmussen's Number of the Day

Indexes|

Index of Contents • Index of Terms