The pushback against false unions

By Red Jahncke, The Washington Times

In its recent Harris v. Quinn decision, the Supreme Court sided with workers who don’t want to join “in-home worker unions,” and don’t want to be forced to pay them nonmember fees. The court’s decision was called “anti-union” and widely interpreted as endangering the existence of such unions.

State Delays Collection of Union Fees

By Hugh McQuaid,

Plans to begin collecting representation fees for a recently-formed home health care workers union have been put on ice while state officials grapple with a Supreme Court ruling that may have made those fees illegal.

A healthy blow to labor overreach

By Ed Feulner, The Washington Times

The Service Employees International Union likes to present itself as the champion of the little guy. But officials of SEIU Healthcare — “the fastest-growing union of health care, child care, home care and nursing home workers in the Midwest” — aren’t averse to a little high living.

Lawmakers call for end to forced unionization

Citizen’s News

State Sen. Joe Markley (R-16) and state Rep. Rob Sampson (R-80) have called for union and state officials to immediately halt the forced unionization of family childcare providers and personal care attendants, in recognition of the Supreme Court ruling in Harris v. Quinn.

Big Labor’s unruly overreach

By Hector Barreto, The Washington Times

For Big Labor bosses, the hits from the U.S. Supreme Court just keep coming. The court ruled last week that President Obama’s shameless attempt to stack the National Labor Relations Board with his hand-picked union sympathizers was, in fact, unconstitutional.