Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Marianno, Bradley D.; Strunk, Katharine O. |
|---|---|
| Titel | After "Janus": A New Era of Teachers Union Activism |
| Quelle | In: Education Next, 18 (2018) 4, S.18-25 (8 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz |
| ISSN | 1539-9664 |
| Schlagwörter | Unions; Activism; Fees; Union Members; Court Litigation; Labor Legislation; Collective Bargaining; Contracts; State Legislation; School Districts; State Courts; Teachers; Administrators; Comparative Analysis; Wisconsin; Michigan |
| Abstract | In "Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31", the U.S. Supreme Court ended the practice of enabling public-sector unions to collect "fair-share" or "agency" fees from employees who decline to join. Although federal law prohibits requiring workers to join a union as a condition of employment, public-sector unions had been allowed to collect some portion of their dues from employees who do not wish to become members. These non-members were required to pay fair-share fees for the non-political activities that benefit all employees covered by the union contract. Speculation about what the Janus decision will mean for teachers unions has been rampant. Most analysts who follow education policy and organized labor believe that the ruling will result in decreased power for teachers unions. The logic behind this assumption is simple: teachers unions will lose dues revenue because membership will decrease and former agency-fee payers will cease paying fees for union services. With fewer resources, teachers unions will have less ability to exert their influence in local, state, and federal elections and at the bargaining table. Fewer members, less money, less power. However agency fees have been challenged at the state level over the past decade, and several states recently stopped allowing unions to collect them. For this article, the authors examine state affiliates of the nation's largest teachers union, the National Education Association (NEA), in Wisconsin and Michigan. They look at changes in membership rates, revenues, and campaign contributions from 2009-2016, the six-year period before and after their new right-to-work laws were adopted. They also interviewed two dozen teachers, administrators, and union officials in Michigan to gather insights about how they have coped on the ground. They focus on Wisconsin and Michigan because the timing of their right-to-work laws provided them with sufficient pre- and post-reform data. With the Wisconsin and Michigan data results, they compared the two states' trends to those of NEA affiliates in two other groups of states: the 25 states that allowed agency fees during the six-year period, which they call "agency-shop" states (including West Virginia, Missouri, and Kentucky), and the 23 states that had right-to-work laws on the books during this time and therefore did not allow fees, which they call "right-to-work" states. (ERIC). |
| Anmerkungen | Hoover Institution. Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-6010. Tel: 800-935-2882; Fax: 650-723-8626; e-mail: educationnext@hoover.stanford.edu; Web site: http://educationnext.org/journal/ |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
| Update | 2020/1/01 |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
