Public-sector union policy in Minnesota

From Ballotpedia
Public-sector union policy in the U.S.

Collective bargaining laws

Relevant legislation

Relevant litigation

Union Station newsletter archive

Janus v. AFSCME

Select a state from the menu for more.

This page is outside of Ballotpedia's current coverage scope and does not receive scheduled updates. If you would like to help our coverage grow, please consider donating to Ballotpedia.

On June 27, 2018, theSupreme Court of the United States issued its decision inJanus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (Janus v. AFSCME), a case concerning the constitutionality of public-sector labor union agency fees. In its 5-4 decision, the court ruled that being required to give any financial support to a union violates employees' rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. WithJanus, the high court overturned the precedent established inAbood v. Detroit Board of Education that had permitted public-sector unions to collect agency fees to support non-political activities such as collective bargaining efforts and administrative work.[1][2]

In anticipation of and in response to this ruling, bills relating to public-sector employee unions were introduced in state legislatures across the United States. This article provides general information on public-sector unions and relevant legislation in Minnesota.

Background

Generally, members of an employee union pay fees to that union. These fees support the union's activities, which can include collective bargaining and contract administration, as well as political activities, such as lobbying. Some public-sector employees do not wish to join a union, and some are opposed to unions' political activities. In 1977, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled, inAbood v. Detroit Board of Education, that employees cannot be required to give financial support to a union's political activities. However, the court found that it was not a violation of employees' rights under theFirst Amendment to the United States Constitution to require them to pay fees to support union activities from which they benefit, such as collective bargaining. This ruling was overturned byJanus, which held that such fees are not constitutional.[3]

Relevant legislation in Minnesota

See also:Public-sector union policy in the United States, 2018-2023

This legislation tracking project has been archived.Click here to view public-sector union legislation introduced from 2018 to 2023.


See also

Select a state on the map below to read more about public-sector employee union legislation in that state.

http://ballotpedia.org/Public_sector_union_policy_in_STATE

Footnotes

v  e
Public-sector union policy in the United States
Public-sector union policy in the United StatesBPstarlogo.png
Ballotpedia
Editorial Content
Josh Altic, Director of ContentDaniel Anderson, Associate Director of Elections & DataCory Eucalitto, Associate Director of FeaturesRyan Byrne, Managing Editor of Ballot MeasuresMandy McConnell, Managing Editor of NewsDoug Kronaizl, Managing Editor of Local ExpansionAbbey Smith, Managing Editor of ElectionsJanie Valentine, Managing Editor of LawJoel Williams, Managing Editor of EventsJoseph Greaney, Managing Editor of PolicyAndrew BahlJaclyn BeranMarielle BrickerJoseph BrusgardEmma BurlingameKelly CoyleJon DunnVictoria EdwardsThomas EllisNicole FisherThomas GrobbenBrianna HoseaMolly KehoeTyler KingGlorie MartinezNorm Leahy, Senior EditorNathan MaxwellJimmy McAllisterBrandon McCauleyAndrew McNairEllie MikusMackenzie MurphyKaley PlatekSamantha PostAdam PowellAnnelise ReinwaldSpencer RichardsonVictoria RoseBriana RyanMyj SaintylMaddy SaluckaEmma SoukupAlexis ThackerMina VogelSamuel WonacottTrenton Woodcox