Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Where the agency shop is illegal, as is common in labor law governing American public sector unions, a "fair share provision" may be agreed to by the union and the employer. [2] [3] The provision requires non-union employees to pay a "fair share fee" to cover the costs of the union's collective bargaining activities. The "fair share" is similar ...
Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, No. 16-1466, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), abbreviated Janus v.AFSCME, is a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on US labor law, concerning the power of labor unions to collect fees from non-union members.
While union members pay "dues" toward collective bargaining, workers who elect Financial Core status pay an equal amount the court referred to as "fees." The worker who chooses Financial Core status is not a union member, cannot run or vote in union elections, and is legally referred to as a "Fee Paying Non Member" or an "Agency Fee Payer."
In the United States, the fee paid by non-union members under the agency shop is known as the "agency fee". [11] [12] [13] Where the agency shop is illegal, as is common in labor law governing American public sector unions, a "fair share provision" may be agreed to by the union and the employer. The provision requires non-union employees a pay ...
Opponents argue that right-to-work laws restrict freedom of association, and limit the sorts of agreements that individuals acting collectively can make with their employer by prohibiting workers and employers from agreeing to contracts that include fair share fees. They also argue that American law imposes a duty of fair representation on ...
Davenport v. Washington Education Association, 551 U.S. 177 (2007), is a ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that it does not violate the First Amendment for a state to require its public-sector unions to receive affirmative authorization from a non-member before spending that nonmember's agency fees for election-related purposes.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Knox v. Service Employees International Union, 567 U.S. 298 (2012), is a United States constitutional law case. The United States Supreme Court held in a 7–2 decision that Dianne Knox and other non-members of the Service Employees International Union did not receive the required notice of a $12 million assessment the union charged them to raise money for the union's political fund.