State Workers Seek to Recoup ‘Fair Share’ Union Fees in Proposed Class-Action Lawsuit

(The Chicago Tribune)—Continuing a fight against public employee unions initially spearheaded by former Gov. Bruce Rauner, nine state workers who say they have opted out of union membership are asking to be repaid for past “fair share” fees in a proposed class-action lawsuit.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday argues that more than 2,700 state employees are entitled to money they paid to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31 from May 1, 2017 — the furthest back they can demand the money under a state statute of limitations — through June 28, 2018, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to make public employees pay union dues. Attorneys for the plaintiffs say they’re seeking close to $2 million from the union.

The lawsuit that led to the Supreme Court decision was championed by Rauner and brought by Mark Janus, a former child support specialist with the Department of Healthcare and Family Services who was represented by the Liberty Justice Center and the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. Those same groups are behind Wednesday’s lawsuit. The plaintiffs worked for a range of departments, including the Illinois State Police and the Department of Children and Family Services, and say they were wrongfully forced to give money to the union.

Janus was the plaintiff in a similar lawsuit that was thrown out earlier this year by U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman, who ruled that AFSCME had followed the law in collecting fair share fees and couldn’t have reasonably anticipated those fees becoming illegal.

“That ruling echoes what more than a dozen other federal and state courts have decided in similar cases,” AFSCME spokesman Anders Lindall said in an email. “The anti-worker, corporate-funded front groups prolonging this failed litigation want to use the courts to further their political attack on working people and our union. Their repeated lawsuits are nothing but a greedy grab for more.”

Workers who weren’t part of the union still got pay increases and benefits the union negotiated, Lindall said.

The president of the Liberty Justice Center acknowledged the lawsuit filed Wednesday makes a similar argument to the one that was unsuccessful.

“We are making the same legal argument and we are appealing the legal argument that was rejected,” he said. “The district judge is not the final say on these issues. We’ll appeal that decision. … Ultimately if we are successful, we’ll see what the unions do. If we are unsuccessful, we’ll appeal that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court and let the justices that decided the Janus decision ultimately decide that case as well.”

A successful appeal would set precedent for the latest suit “to recover the money that we feel is owed,” he said.

Though he is not named as a plaintiff in the suit filed Wednesday, Janus is part of the class the “fair share” lawsuit seeks to define, and he spoke at the news conference.

“We just want our money back,” Janus said.