IS FRIEDRICHS VS. CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION A DEATH KNELL FOR ALL UNIONS
(Mensaje se repite en Español)
The ramifications of the Friedrichs vs. California Teachers Association (CTA) that is now pending before the United States Supreme Court go far beyond the public sector unions and employees litigating this case with specious allegations of their 1st Amendment free speech rights being violated by what Justice Kennedy called "coerced speech."
In reality, it also has very little to do with the fair-share agency fees required of all public employees like teachers who are exclusively represented by a union like CTA, but choose not to be members of that union, because they do not share the political views and support given by that union to predominantly Democratic candidates and issues. Already public employee unions must segregate the funds collected to defray the costs of collective bargaining on behalf of all workers- who they have had the exclusive right to represent- and any supplemental political actions the union chooses to engage in and fund only from members dues.
In a country where only 6.6% of workers in the private sector and 35.7% of public sector workers remain unionized, the clear purpose of the Friedrichs case seems to be in dealing a final mortal blow to what remains of unions in this country. If Rebecca Friedrichs and her co-plaintiffs being represented by Michael Carvin and other elite conservative attorneys given carte blanche by the billionaire boys club are successful, not only will they not have to pay for union representation, but it is highly likely that a high percentage of the remaining 325,000 union membership in CTA will quit the union in much the same manner as we have already seen after Governor Scott Walker's siege against unions in Wisconsin.
Since Governor Walker's attack on unions, "American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees has lost 18,000 of its previous 32,000 members and has seen its annual revenue fall from $10 million to $5.5 million." In addition, "The state's largest teachers union, the Wisconsin Education Association Council, has lost more than a third of its members." It seems highly unlikely that unions that have spent $1.7 billion in the 2012 elections will be able to do so in 2016, if they are being confronted by their own bankruptcy.
There is a certain irony in the fact that while the principal free speech argument under the 1st Amendment in the Friedrichs case is weak, there is a much stronger contracts argument that the Friedrichs lawyers might have made. That argument is based on a complete and utter failure of consideration under contract law. All teachers be they members of the union or mere agency fee payer must get something for their fees and/or dues. With literally thousands of teachers- most of whom are at the top of the salary scale or about to vest in expensive lifetime health benefits- being summarily removed from their teaching careers without the teachers unions (CTA, AFT, UTLA, and others) lifting a finger to defend them, a fair question to be asked is what are any public employees paying their union for, if when they finally need legal defense, the union is not only nowhere to be found, but rather colludes with the school districts or other public entities that have illegally targeted them in complete derrogation of their supposed collective bargaining rights and basic constitutional rights.
If in actuality there is no benefit to the employee and no burden on the union to defend them, then Rebecca Friedrichs can truly ask what are any teachers paying the union for?
While I have always been a strong supporter of unions as the defender of labor, a union that has long colluded with management against the interests of their rank and file is worse than no union, since it creates the expectation among the workers- blue and white collar- that they have an advocate based on their numbers, but in reality all their is is a union illusion that they would be better off without.
The Friedrichs case is a wakeup call. Corrupt unions need to be forced into some kind of receivership as both state and federal law provide for in dealing with all corrupt and/or bankrupt entities.
If you or someone you know has been targeted and are in the process of being dismissed and need legal defense, get in touch:
Lenny@perdaily.com
Blogs We Love
Do you find the media and their "teachers-suck," "power to principals," "privatization is the best thing that's happened to public schools" disgusting and distasteful? The powers that be may "control" the main media but it's people like us who control the SOCIAL MEDIA. Hungry for more information about crusading educators going against the grain to do what's right for teachers, unions, communities, and children? Check out some more blogs below:
- EdWize UFT
- Protect Portelos
- Hemlock on the Rocks
- NYC Educator
- NYC Rubber Room Reporter and ATR
- MORE Caucus
- NYC Eye
- South Bronx School
- Chaz's School Daze
- With a Brooklyn Accent
- B-LoEdScene
- Urban Ed
- PERDAILY
- Ed in the Apple
- Jose Vilson Blog
- Raging Horse Blog
- Accountable Talk
- Ed Law FAQs
- The Assailed Teacher
- EdNotes Online
The teacher jail issue could bite UTLA in the butt. UTLA has really NOT been helpful to these teachers. Failure to do that could result in losing members if the rank and file figure out they are paying UTLA money and not really getting anything for it.
Many of those not in teacher jail think, "That won't happen to me. I am a good teacher. I don't do anything immoral." I think one purpose of teacher jail is to get those teachers away from their colleagues resulting in "out of sight, out of mind".
Sometimes I wonder if UTLA has been a willing participant in LAUSD's targetings because, if an over-40 teacher can be eliminated, it can allow for TWO rookies to be hired (an extra person to pay UTLA dues).
I still suspect there are deeper issues that are not openly discussed because LAUSD's money issues can't be solved by firing every over-40 male teacher it can.