Editing Union security agreement (section)

== ''Janus v. AFSCME'' ==
{{Main|Janus v. AFSCME}}
''Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31'', _ US _ (2018) is a [[US labor law]] case, concerning whether governments violate the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] when they require their employees to pay fees to a union as a condition of employment.

In February 2015, [[Illinois]] Republican Governor [[Bruce Rauner]] filed suit, claiming that [[fair-share agreement]]s are unconstitutional and a violation of the [[First Amendment]] right to free speech.

In March 2015, three government workers from Illinois represented by attorneys from the Illinois-based Liberty Justice Center and Virginia-based [[National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation]] took legal action to intervene in the case.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.illinoispolicy.org/press-releases/state-workers-in-illinois-sue-to-end-mandatory-union-fees/|title=State workers in Illinois sue to end mandatory union fees|date=2015-03-23|work=Illinois Policy|access-date=2018-06-21|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/unions-battle-for-survival-in-key-strongholds-as-court-cases-challenge-forced-dues/|title=Unions battle for survival in key strongholds as court cases challenge forced dues|last=Ravve|first=Ruth|date=2015-04-06|work=Fox News|access-date=2018-06-21|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/3-state-employees-want-to-join-rauner-lawsuit-over-fair-share-union-fees/|title=3 state employees want to join Rauner lawsuit over 'fair share' union fees|work=Chicago Sun-Times|access-date=2018-06-21|language=en}}</ref> In May 2015, Rauner was dropped from the case, after a federal judge ruled that the governor did not have standing to bring such a suit, but the case proceeded under a new name, ''Janus v. AFSCME.''<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/ct-rauner-fair-share-union-lawsuit-met-0520-20150519-story.html|title=Judge drops Rauner 'fair share' suit, lets non-union workers' case proceed|last=Pearson|first=Rick|work=chicagotribune.com|access-date=2018-06-21|language=en-US}}</ref> The case is named after Mark Janus, an Illinois child support specialist covered by a [[Collective agreement|collective bargaining agreement]].

Janus claimed that he should not need to pay fees to the [[American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees]] because doing so constitutes paying for political speech with which Janus disagrees.<ref>{{cite web| url=https://ljc-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/2016/12/Rauner-v.-AFSCME-120-First-Amended-Complaint-2015.06.01.pdf | title=Case: 1:15-cv-01235 - MARK JANUS, MARIE QUIGLEY, and BRIAN TRYGG v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31; General teamsters/professional & technical employees Local Union no. 916; Tom Tyrrell | date=2015-06-01 | access-date=2024-01-29}}</ref> This became permissible after a 1977 decision by the [[US Supreme Court]] in ''[[Abood v. Detroit Board of Education]]''.

In June 2018, the [[US Supreme Court]] ruled in favor of Janus, in a 5–4 decision, and stated that "States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees".<ref>{{cite web| url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1466_2b3j.pdf | title=JANUS v. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL 31, ET AL | date=2018-06-27 | access-date=2024-01-29}}</ref>