New York law may blunt impact of Supreme Court ruling on payments to unions

ALBANY, N.Y. — Reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that government workers cannot be required to pay for union representation was swift and vehement, with many New York State officials condemning the 5-4 ruling and noting New York law may blunt the ruling’s impact here.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo called the ruling a victory for “extreme conservatives and billionaires intent on diminishing the power of organized labor.”

Likewise, New York Attorney General Barbara D. Underwood called the Supreme Court’s decision in Mark Janus vs. AFSCME Council 31 “a difficult set back.” Underwood’s office had filed a friend-of-the-court brief in favor of what proved to be the losing side in the case while now-disgraced former Attorney General Eric Schneidermann was in office.

Both Cuomo and Underwood noted that legislation passed in the Assembly and Senate earlier this year limits when public employees can withdraw authorization to pay for union representation. “Here in New York, even prior to today’s decision, we passed a law that strengthens workers’ right to organize,” Underwood said. “Our office will use this law and all available avenues to protect public workers’ right to organize and promote government efficiency, labor peace, and worker strength.”

Heather C. Briccetti, president and CEO of the Business Council of New York State, called the ruling a victory for employee choice and freedom of speech, but noted the new state law could weaken its impact. “Unfortunately for many New Yorkers directly affected by this issue, the impact of the decision will be limited due to a last-minute provision tucked into the recently adopted state budget. The provision significantly limits an employee’s timeframe and ability to opt-out of dues deductions, all but eliminating the freedom given to employees in other states thanks to the Janus decision.”

Karen Harned, executive director of the NFIB Small Business Legal Center in Washington, D.C., called the ruling a win for small business.

“For too long dissenting public employees have been forced to fund public employee unions that they do not agree with. In the past, armed with a guaranteed stream of revenue, public employee unions grew in influence and power, shutting out other voices, including that of small business who cannot afford increased taxes, more red tape, and onerous regulations.”

While Cuomo and Underwood pledged to use New York law to protect unions, Briccetti wondered if that law would hold up. “It will be interesting to see if New York’s attempt to circumvent employee choice will be challenged in court,” she said. “In the meantime, it is unfortunate that New York lawmakers decided to put politics over their constituents’ ability to freely express themselves.”

Contact McChesney at cmcchesney@cnybj.com

Image credit: Wiki commons