Morning Briefing
Summaries of health policy coverage from major news organizations
Supreme Court Hears Arguments For 'Fair Share' Case That Could Potentially Cripple Unions
NPR: Supreme Court Hears Fiery Arguments In Case That Could Gut Public Sector Unions
The Supreme Court heard fiery arguments Monday in a case that could remove a key revenue stream for public sector unions. A sharply divided court could be poised to overturn a 40-year-old Supreme Court decision that would further undermine an already shrinking union movement. Attorneys for Mark Janus, a child support specialist for the state of Illinois, argue that people like Janus, who choose not to join a union, shouldn't be compelled to pay partial union fees. (Totenberg, 2/26)
Modern Healthcare: Healthcare Leaders Worry Supreme Court Case On Union Fees Could Hurt Workplace Harmony And Quality Of Care
Joyce Robertson has been a public health nurse with the Cook County Health & Hospitals System in Chicago for 24 years. She says her labor union, National Nurses United, has repeatedly backed her up when her supervisors have retaliated against her for activism in protecting quality of care. Now she's worried about the outcome of a case being heard by the U.S. Supreme Court Monday that could have enormous ramifications for healthcare organizations. Janus v. AFSCME challenges the right of public-sector unions to collect mandatory fees, known as agency fees, from employees in the bargaining unit to represent them in contract negotiations. Twenty-two states allow such mandatory collections. Fees to cover a union's political activities already are optional under a previous Supreme Court ruling. (Meyer, 2/23)
