Federal Court Prunes Wisconsin Labor Law
show comments
  • Nat

    I will forever believe that the GOP included those two provisions as bargaining chips that they intended to give in too. If the Dems and unions weren’t pressured on those they would have complained more about the rest and the politics of the bargaining changes would have been worse. If the Dems hadn’t thrown a tantrum and run they could’ve negotiated those provisions away.

  • And the federal courts get to have the last word on such subjects . . . why? It would have been helpful – yeah, I know; I can look it up myself – to have some further amplification of the ruling, to let us know, without going to primary sources on our own, how it is that requiring unions to bill their members for dues raises a legitimate federal question. It may, and obviously this court believed that it does, but the unexplained opinion of the professor would take on a bit more heft with a bit more analysis. Just sayin’ . . .

  • Corlyss

    “Teacher and other unions can continue to have dues deducted from member paychecks rather than having to bill the members directly, and the unions don’t have to go through a fresh certification vote every year.

    On the other hand, the portions of the law that sharply curtail union bargaining powers remain in place.”

    Well, if you ask Republican strategists, the first is far more important than the last. Time will eventually eliminate collective bargaining for public employees. The primary blood vessle of cash that is the “right” to have the state automatically collect union dues for the corrupt Democratic organs that are the unions is what allows them to force their will on so many workers who would otherwise tell the unions to pound sand. That is the extortionate practice that desperately needed to be terminated.

  • Charles R. Williams

    This decision strikes me as absurd. Why can’t a state deal with one group of state workers differently from a second group? Why is it necessary for the state to show a “rational basis” for this distinction? We are not dealing with fundamental rights here nor are we dealing with forbidden classes of discrimination. There is no way the decision will be upheld on appeal.

  • “Common sense”? Try common thuggery.

    If the unions provide value, the members will pay for them, and vote to renew each year. If they don’t then the unions will die a deserved death. This decision is nothing more than a union payoff by an Obama appointee. Here’s hoping the State of Wisconsin gets an immediate stay.

  • Glen

    If Republicans in Wisconsin and Ohio aren’t leading in the right way, then who is? Rhode Island Democrats? What works in a state smaller and more homogenous than many counties won’t necessarily work everywhere.

    And please stop claiming that either New York or (especially) California are examples of anything but Titanic remodels.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.