A City University of New York professor says it is “abhorrent” that New York state law forces him and his colleagues to be represented by a union proven to have ignored instances of anti-Semitism.

Kingsborough Community College business department chairman Jeffrey Lax is one of six professors suing to sever ties with the Professional Staff Congress, CUNY’s faculty union. Lax was one of the first of 300 professors who resigned from the Professional Staff Congress last year after the union passed a resolution condemning Israel. Lax and his fellow plaintiffs, most of whom are Jewish, say they no longer feel represented by the anti-Zionist union….

The Fairness Center, a law firm that represents public-sector union workers, said the professors’ suit seeks to “vindicate” the First Amendment rights that the New York law strips from the professors by forcing them to work with the union.

“Our clients, most of whom are Jewish, should not be forced to associate with a union that engages in hateful, anti-Israel rhetoric and political activity,” Nathan McGrath, president of the Fairness Center, told the Free Beacon. “But New York law gives them no choice. That’s why they’ve brought this lawsuit to vindicate their constitutional rights of free speech and free association.”

Read the Full Article here: https://freebeacon.com/campus/cuny-professors-sue-to-break-with-anti-semitic-union/

The post CUNY Professors Sue To Break With Anti-Semitic Union appeared first on The Fairness Center.

Contact: Conner Drigotas, 844-293-1001, conner@fairnesscenter.org

August 23, 2018, Harrisburg, Pa. – Four religious objectors to union membership received checks last week from the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA), a return of thousands of dollars the union now acknowledges they have no right to hold. The teachers continue to seek a permanent resolution to a years-long legal battle with the PSEA—a court ruling that their constitutional rights were violated and ensuring they will not be violated again.

As religious objectors to union payments, Fairness Center clients Jane Ladley (now retired, Chester County), Chris Meier (Lancaster County), Linda Misja (Armstrong County), and James Williams (Armstrong County) had the right to support a charity instead of the union. But for years, the PSEA rejected their chosen charities, instead holding their money in escrow and demanding that objectors donate to a charity that advances union viewpoints that led them to become religious objectors in the first place.

That policy led to multiple lawsuits challenging the unions right to indefinitely hold money intended for charity. The Fairness Center, a nonprofit public interest law firm, represents clients from across the state who have had funds withheld from charitable organizations for years.

Following the United States Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31 in June 2018, public employee nonmembers of unions across the country were able to free themselves from forced fees. For religious objectors in Pennsylvania, Janus also raised questions as to how to handle escrowed money.

The PSEA’s decision to refund escrowed money addresses one of the issues involved in these cases, but it does not address the core issue: whether Pennsylvania law remains constitutional under Janus. That is why Jane and several other Fairness Center clients seek to secure a long-lasting ruling to ensure that Pennsylvania law is struck down under Janus. It remains important to secure such a ruling and enjoin the unions from hurting these teachers again.

After receiving her check from the PSEA, Ms. Ladley chose to donate her money to the Constitutional Organization of Liberty (COOL), an organization that educates Pennsylvanians on the Constitution and founding principles. For years, the PSEA had blocked Ms. Ladley’s efforts to donate her money to COOL on ideological grounds.

“We appreciate the gift that Ms. Ladley is providing to COOL but we are especially excited on her behalf to see her convictions reinforced by the Supreme Court” commented Greg Keiper, Chairman of COOL, “This ruling isn’t simply about money but about how an individual can exercise their God-given liberties by using their own resources as they see fit, without compromising their own values. My hope is that the Supreme Court’s ruling is fully implemented here in Pennsylvania.”

David Osborne, President and General Counsel of the Fairness Center commented, “Now that these funds are delivered to the proper place, the next step can begin: making sure religious objectors are permanently protected from union interference.”

Documents:

• Misja v. PSEA Backgrounder
• Ladley and Meier v. PSEA Backgrounder

Fairness Center President David Osborne is available for comment. Contact Conner Drigotas at 844-293-1001 or conner@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit public interest law firm offering free legal services to those hurt by public employee union officials. Fairness Center attorneys provide clients with a voice in the court of law and the court of public opinion. For more information visit www.FairnessCenter.org.

The post Union Returns Teachers’ Money as Battle Over Constitutional Rights Heads Toward Resolution appeared first on The Fairness Center.

Contact: Conner Drigotas, 844-293-1001, conner@fairnesscenter.org

August 23, 2018, Harrisburg, Pa. – Four religious objectors to union membership received checks last week from the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA), a return of thousands of dollars the union now acknowledges they have no right to hold. The teachers continue to seek a permanent resolution to a years-long legal battle with the PSEA—a court ruling that their constitutional rights were violated and ensuring they will not be violated again.

As religious objectors to union payments, Fairness Center clients Jane Ladley (now retired, Chester County), Chris Meier (Lancaster County), Linda Misja (Armstrong County), and James Williams (Armstrong County) had the right to support a charity instead of the union. But for years, the PSEA rejected their chosen charities, instead holding their money in escrow and demanding that objectors donate to a charity that advances union viewpoints that led them to become religious objectors in the first place.

That policy led to multiple lawsuits challenging the unions right to indefinitely hold money intended for charity. The Fairness Center, a nonprofit public interest law firm, represents clients from across the state who have had funds withheld from charitable organizations for years.

Following the United States Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31 in June 2018, public employee nonmembers of unions across the country were able to free themselves from forced fees. For religious objectors in Pennsylvania, Janus also raised questions as to how to handle escrowed money.

The PSEA’s decision to refund escrowed money addresses one of the issues involved in these cases, but it does not address the core issue: whether Pennsylvania law remains constitutional under Janus. That is why Jane and several other Fairness Center clients seek to secure a long-lasting ruling to ensure that Pennsylvania law is struck down under Janus. It remains important to secure such a ruling and enjoin the unions from hurting these teachers again.

After receiving her check from the PSEA, Ms. Ladley chose to donate her money to the Constitutional Organization of Liberty (COOL), an organization that educates Pennsylvanians on the Constitution and founding principles. For years, the PSEA had blocked Ms. Ladley’s efforts to donate her money to COOL on ideological grounds.

“We appreciate the gift that Ms. Ladley is providing to COOL but we are especially excited on her behalf to see her convictions reinforced by the Supreme Court” commented Greg Keiper, Chairman of COOL, “This ruling isn’t simply about money but about how an individual can exercise their God-given liberties by using their own resources as they see fit, without compromising their own values. My hope is that the Supreme Court’s ruling is fully implemented here in Pennsylvania.”

David Osborne, President and General Counsel of the Fairness Center commented, “Now that these funds are delivered to the proper place, the next step can begin: making sure religious objectors are permanently protected from union interference.”

Documents:

• Misja v. PSEA Backgrounder
• Ladley and Meier v. PSEA Backgrounder

Fairness Center President David Osborne is available for comment. Contact Conner Drigotas at 844-293-1001 or conner@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit public interest law firm offering free legal services to those hurt by public employee union officials. Fairness Center attorneys provide clients with a voice in the court of law and the court of public opinion. For more information visit www.FairnessCenter.org.

The post Union Returns Teachers’ Money as Battle Over Constitutional Rights Heads Toward Resolution appeared first on The Fairness Center.

Contact: Conner Drigotas, 844-293-1001, conner@fairnesscenter.org

August 21, 2018, Harrisburg, Pa.—Twenty thousand home care workers across Pennsylvania are about to have their working relationships with the disabled and elderly invaded by an unwelcome third party at Governor Tom Wolf’s behest. Today, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in the governor’s favor in Smith v. Wolf and Markham v. Wolf, enabling a union takeover of a major sector within Pennsylvania’s home care industry.

The ruling overturns an earlier Commonwealth Court decision which invalidated Wolf’s executive order, allowing a union to exercise exclusive representation over certain home care workers. In its 2016 decision, the Commonwealth Court called Wolf’s order “de facto legislation” that violated the separation of powers and further stated that the order “invades the relationship” between a home care worker and care recipient.

But the Supreme Court vacated the Commonwealth Court’s opinion and took a different view. In a 5-2 opinion written by Justice Debra Todd, the Court held that the executive order, while completely unenforceable, nevertheless was “nevertheless a permissible exercise of gubernatorial power.”

“For the last three years, our clients Dave Smith and Don Lambrecht have beaten back Governor Wolf’s attempts to give control of their private employment arrangement to a special interest and campaign donor,” commented David Osborne, president and general counsel for the Fairness Center and attorney for Dave and Don. “Unfortunately, this decision fails to protect their working relationship and decades-long friendship from being invaded by an unwanted union.”

“Because many home care workers serve family members, this ruling unionizes parents against their disabled children, sons and daughters against their elderly parents, and, as with my clients, friends against friends.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling will force all 20,000 Pennsylvania home care workers providing direct care to the elderly and disabled to abide by work rules and restrictions mutually agreed to by the governor and a union backed by the Service Employees’ International Union (SEIU) and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)—even if the home care workers choose not to join the union. The union is also primed to “skim” union dues from members’ Medicaid- or state-funded paychecks, which could amount to a nearly $8 million annual windfall for the SEIU-backed union. The SEIU has given more than $2 million to Wolf’s election campaigns.

Don, who for more than 27 years has provided in-home care for his friend Dave Smith, a home-bound Phoenixville resident with muscular dystrophy resulting in quadriplegia, says union interference will fundamentally alter the care he can provide.

“Dave needs 24-hour care,” said Lambrecht. “This isn’t the type of job where you clock in and clock out and take an hour for lunch.”

Dave is unsure what the future will hold, but is thankful for the help of his good friend: “Don is really like a part of my family as much as anything.”

The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Commonwealth Court, which will address a related claim that Governor Wolf’s executive order violated homecare workers’ privacy rights.

Case Timeline

• February 2015: Gov. Wolf issues an executive order enabling the unionization of up to 20,000 home care workers. This would have enabled an SEIU-backed union to siphon millions of dollars in annual dues from home care workers.
• April 2015: The Fairness Center’s clients Dave Smith, who is homebound with muscular dystrophy and receives in-home care, and Don Lambrecht, Dave’s home care provider, file suit in Commonwealth Court, requesting emergency relief to stop the unionization scheme. The Commonwealth Court issues a preliminary injunction preventing Wolf from further implementing the executive order.
• October 2016: The Commonwealth Court invalidates Wolf’s order. Wolf appeals the Commonwealth Court’s ruling to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
• November 2016: The Commonwealth Court enjoins Wolf during his appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from implementing the executive order or anything in accordance with it.
• Early 2017: The Wolf administration and an SEIU-created nonprofit agree to a mandatory home care worker orientation program as envisioned by the executive order, funneling up to $1.25 million to the union-backed nonprofit.
• July 2017: The Fairness Center’s clients petition the Commonwealth Court to enforce its permanent injunction and end the orientation program.
• October 2017: The Wolf administration agrees to suspend the orientation program pending the state Supreme Court’s decision.
• November 2017: Oral Argument held before the state Supreme Court on Wolf’s appeal of the Commonwealth Court’s October 2016 decision.
• August 21, 2018: The Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules in Wolf’s favor, overturning the Commonwealth Court’s decision and permitting the unionization of 20,000 home care workers.

Documents:

• Case Backgrounder
• Appellee’s Brief

Fairness Center President David Osborne is available for comment. Contact Conner Drigotas at 844-293-1001 or conner@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

The post Pa. Supreme Court Grants Wolf’s Wish, Allows Union to Invade Homecare System appeared first on The Fairness Center.

May 9, 2018, READING, Pa.—For years, the cost of union ghost teachers has haunted one of the nation’s poorest school districts, where taxpayers have funded union operations to the tune of over $500,000 since 2011. But after a nonprofit organization representing Reading taxpayers filed a lawsuit to end the practice, this costly backroom deal is finally coming to an end.

Since 2011, Reading School District has paid teachers to leave the classroom and work full-time for the local teachers’ union, the Reading Education Association (REA). These ghost teachers were paid taxpayer-funded salaries, given public pension credits, and accrued teaching seniority despite working solely for the union.

Last year, Americans for Fair Treatment, a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting the rights of public employees, filed a lawsuit in Berks County Court with the help of the Fairness Center to end this abusive practice. A separate complaint was filed with the Public School Employees’ Retirement System (PSERS) disputing state pension credits awarded to Reading’s ghost teachers.

After months of litigation, the REA has agreed in a memorandum of understanding with the District to start reimbursing the school district for ghost teacher costs previously borne by local taxpayers. Meanwhile, PSERS has revoked ghost teaching-related pension credit from at least one of the REA’s ghost teaching union officials.

Today, as a result of the REA’s promise to reimburse for future ghost teacher costs, Americans for Fair Treatment filed papers with the court to have its case discontinued. Despite the REA’s promise to start reimbursing certain ghost teaching costs, the union has refused to repay costs from prior years.

Americans for Fair Treatment issued the following statement: “We’re encouraged to see the Reading teachers’ union come to their senses, but the truth is, ghost teaching is a state problem that the General Assembly must address.”

Two bills pending in the General Assembly would address the ghost teaching arrangement so common across the Commonwealth: SB 494 and HB 164. SB 494, introduced by State Senator Pat Stefano, has already reached the Senate floor after approval by the Senate Education Committee.

“It shouldn’t take a lawsuit to stop taxpayer abuse like this,” commented David Osborne, president and general counsel for the Fairness Center. “Our public schools are paying teachers not to teach.”

In 2012, Reading School District was forced to lay off 110 teachers, along with hundreds of other employees, to save money. During this time, the terms of the REA contract forced the district to continue paying the salary and benefits of a ghost teacher who worked full-time for the union.

More than 20 percent of Pennsylvania’s 500 school districts authorize full-time ghost teachers, according to a statewide survey of school district collective bargaining agreements. Ghost teacher practices in, among other school districts, Erie City School District and the School District of Lancaster were suspended after the Fairness Center’s clients brought attention to this issue via litigation in Philadelphia and Allentown.

A similar lawsuit over ghost teachers in Allentown School District remains before the Lehigh County Court.

The Plaintiff

Americans for Fair Treatment is a nonprofit whose purpose is to equip and empower Americans to receive fair treatment from government union officials. Members of the organization include teachers, public employees who’ve opted out of union membership, taxpayers, and others who support the rights of public employees.

Case documents

• Backgrounder
• Berks County Complaint
• PSERS Complaint
• REA President Compensation Details

David Osborne is available for comment today. Please contact Conner Drigotas at 717- 409-6964 or Conner@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit, public interest law firm offering free legal services to those hurt by public employee union officials. For more information visit www.fairnesscenter.org.

The post Reading Taxpayers Victorious in Ghost Teacher Battle appeared first on The Fairness Center.

March 26, 2018, State College, Pa.—Michael Cronin, a doctoral student and graduate assistant, came to Penn State University to get an education, not to join a union. But a union backed by the Pennsylvania State Education Association says that Cronin and his graduate assistant colleagues are public employee —and has targeted him and nearly 4,000 other graduate assistants for unionization.

Faced with the prospect of losing the ability to determine his own educational future, Cronin, who studies Energy and Mineral Engineering, filed a motion to intervene in an ongoing legal matter before the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB). He ultimately seeks to halt a union election scheduled for April and overturn a hearing examiner’s decision to designate him a public employee pending legal review.

“I accepted my appointment [at PSU] to further my education,” Cronin stated in an affidavit filed with the PLRB Friday afternoon. “Had I merely sought to earn money as an employee during my time as a doctoral student, I could have and would have done something other than being a graduate assistant.”

A 1977 Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision in Philadelphia Ass’n of Interns & Residents v. Albert Einstein Medical Center, Temple University established that individuals paid to perform work primarily for educational or training purposes could not be unionized. See the case backgrounder (linked below) for more detail.

“State Supreme Court precedent clearly puts graduate assistants like Michael off-limits for unionization,” commented David Osborne, president and general counsel for the Fairness Center, which represents Cronin. “The Court reasoned that because graduate assistants are primarily seeking education, not employment, and because their positions are temporary, they cannot be considered employees and cannot be subjected to exclusive representation. However, the PLRB has ignored this precedent since the mid-1990s, and no legal challenge has been brought since.”

Union elections are expected in April at Penn State University campuses across the state, including University Park, Hershey Medical, and PSU Harrisburg. Should a majority of those voting in the election approve the union, all Penn State University graduate assistants would be forced into a bargaining unit represented by the PSEA-backed Coalition of Graduate Employees (CGE). All graduate assistants would then be forced to abide by the contract and work rules negotiated by the CGE, even if they did not vote for the CGE.

These students could be called on to strike under certain circumstances, potentially delaying their graduation dates and negatively impacting their career opportunities as a result.

“The duties I perform as a function of my service as a graduate assistant are primarily educational and train me for a future career,” continues Cronin’s sworn statement. “I do not consent to the Coalition of Graduate Employees representation. I should be free to speak for myself.”

The Plaintiff:

Michael Cronin is a doctoral student of Energy and Mineral Engineering at Penn State University, where he is working with two faculty advisors on his dissertation and expects to graduate in 2020.

Documents:

• Case Backgrounder
• Michael Cronin’s Motion to Intervene

Michael Cronin and David Osborne are available for comment.

Contact Conner Drigotas at 844-293-1001 or conner@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit, public interest law firm offering free legal services to those hurt by public employee union officials. For more information visit www.FairnessCenter.org.

The post PSU Grad Student Files Motion to Intervene, Protect Student Rights in Unionization Fight appeared first on The Fairness Center.

The Fairness Center
Contact: Conner Drigotas, 844-293-1001, conner@fairnesscenter.org

MARCH 6, 2018, NEW HAVEN, CT.—More than two years ago, New Haven’s International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 825, ended its membership in a state-wide union, the Uniformed Professional Fire Fighters Association of Connecticut (UPFFA). But since then, Local 825 has continued to receive bills for UPFFA membership dues—bills that now total over $52,000 and for which the UPFFA is demanding payment.

Today, Local 825 announced a lawsuit, filed yesterday in the Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of New Haven, reaffirming its disassociation from the UPFFA and seeking to bar the UPFFA from collecting membership dues to which it is not entitled.

“State union bureaucrats who don’t fight fires are trying to pick our pockets,” commented Frank Ricci, president of Local 825. “We left the state union more than two years ago, and they aren’t entitled to a cent from us since then—especially after they betrayed our trust by misusing our money. But that hasn’t stopped them from trying to siphon resources away from New Haven’s firefighters.

“Because the state union won’t honor our choice to leave, we’re asking the court to step in. We are risking our lives to fight for the community. We shouldn’t also have to fight state union bureaucrats.”

In January 2016, Local 825 voted unanimously to leave the UPFFA, citing a lack of leadership and diminishing return on investment. The president of the UPFFA recognized Local 825’s decision to terminate their membership but continued sending bills for membership dues while exerting pressure on Local 825 leadership to reconsider.

In February 2016, Local 825 leadership uncovered misappropriation of dues money by the UPFFA, confirming their decision to leave the state organization. The UPFFA has since hired a collections agency to intimidate Local 825 into paying monthly membership dues they do not owe.

“Our choice to leave the state union should be respected,” continued Ricci. “Union bureaucrats are trying to trap us in an organization we don’t want or need and bully us into paying for the privilege. We have no choice but to seek a legal remedy.”

Documents:

• Case backgrounder
• Complaint

Biographical Information:

Frank Ricci is the President of New Haven Fire Fighters Local 825 and a Battalion Chief. He is Contributing Editor and Advisory Board Member for Fire Engineering. In this role he serves on the board of PennWell Fire Group. He is the Drillmaster for the New Haven Fire Department and co-hosts the radio show Politics & Tactics. He has worked as a Fire Department Instructor’s Conference hot instructor and is an FDIC lecturer. Frank has appeared on Hannity, Lou Dobbs, Hardball, NBC Nightly News, Fox & Friends, and other notable news shows. He has won a landmark case before the U.S. Supreme Court and has testified before Congress. Frank has been a lead consultant for Yale on several studies and has lectured at the Reagan Library.

Frank Ricci and Nathan McGrath, vice president and litigation counsel for the Fairness Center, are available for comment. Contact Conner Drigotas at 844-293-1001 or conner@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit, public interest law firm offering free legal services to those facing unjust treatment from public employee union officials. For more information visit www.FairnessCenter.org.

The post Local 825 Sues State Union in Membership Dispute appeared first on The Fairness Center.

December 4, 2017, Philadelphia, Pa.—Today, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania let stand Gov. Wolf’s politically-motivated removal of Bill Green as Chair of Philadelphia’s School Reform Commission (SRC). Wolf removed Green as Chair in 2015, immediately after Green led a vote to approve new charter schools in the city.

Green filed a lawsuit in 2016, with the help of the Fairness Center, to shield the SRC from political manipulation and to protect the independence of the office of Chair. The suit argued that SRC Chair is an independent office and appointees to that office could not be removed without cause.

The Commonwealth Court’s ruling, written by Judge Joseph M. Cosgrove, acknowledged that Green was removed without cause, stating, “[T]here is no question that Petitioner [Green] has not engaged in any such malfeasance or misfeasance,” but determined that SRC Chair is not an independent office entitled to protection from such removal:

Petitioner was not removed from office. While he no longer holds the position of chairman, he is nonetheless a full, commissioned member of the SRC in good standing, holding all the rights and privileges of that office until his term ends, he is removed pursuant to Section 696(b)(2) of the School Code, or the SRC ceases to exist.

Bill Green released the following statement in response to the Court’s decision:

The SRC, while not always agreeing, has worked effectively as a team and accomplished a great deal. It is now settled that Marge Neff and Joyce Wilkerson were and are Chair.  I will continue to work with Chair Wilkerson to make sure the transition to local control is as smooth as possible. While I don’t agree with every aspect of the ruling it does not seem worth pursuing this matter further given last month’s vote to dissolve the SRC.

I want to thank the Fairness Center for taking on this case and acknowledge the hard work of attorneys David Osborne and Karin Sweigart.

“The Court has determined that the SRC Chair can be appointed or dismissed at the governor’s whim,” commented David Osborne, president and general counsel for the Fairness Center. “Since Wolf did not also remove Bill as an SRC member, the court ruled in the governor’s favor and dismissed the lawsuit.”

The Plaintiff

Bill Green is a native Philadelphian and has been a member of the School Reform Commission since 2014. He also served as a Democratic city councilman at-large in Philadelphia from 2008-2014. Green resigned from city council to join the SRC as chair as a volunteer, giving up his $130,000-a-year council salary and a pension because he believes Philadelphia’s children deserve the opportunity to receive a great education.

In the private sector, Green has founded several businesses and represented Fortune 500 companies and start-ups as a corporate lawyer.

Case Documents

• Legal backgrounder
• Complaint

David Osborne is available for comment. Contact Conner Drigotas, 844.293.1001, cddrigotas@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit, public interest law firm offering free legal services to those facing unjust treatment from public employee union leaders. For more information visit www.FairnessCenter.org.

The post Court Rules Governor Can Fire SRC Chair Without Cause appeared first on The Fairness Center.

Contact: John Bouder, 570-490-1042, john@fairnesscenter.org

November 27, 2017, HARRISBURG, Pa.—Last year, Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court overturned Gov. Tom Wolf’s 2015 executive order which would have forced unionization on 20,000 home care workers and delivered up to $8 million in annual dues to a union backed by SEIU and AFSCME—two of Wolf’s major campaign contributors.

The Wolf administration appealed the Commonwealth Court’s decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which will hear oral argument tomorrow.

The Fairness Center will argue on behalf of its clients Dave Smith, who is homebound with muscular dystrophy, and Don Lambrecht, Dave’s in-home care provider of 25 years, who successfully sued to block Wolf’s executive order.

Oral argument on Wolf’s appeal is scheduled for tomorrow, November 28, at 9:00 a.m. and will take place in the Harrisburg Supreme Court Courtroom.

Click here for more background on this case, including a timeline of events.

The Fairness Center’s attorneys are available for comment. Please contact John Bouder at 570-490-1042 or john@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit, public interest law firm offering free legal services to those facing unjust treatment from public employee union officials. For more information visit www.FairnessCenter.org.

The post Wolf’s Homecare Unionization Scheme Heads to Pa. Supreme Court Tomorrow appeared first on The Fairness Center.

Contact: Conner Drigotas, 844.293.1001, cddrigotas@fairnesscenter.org

November 21, 2017, HARRISBURG, Pa.—Should a union dictate how parents care for disabled children at home? Can the governor circumvent the state Legislature and make law benefitting a special interest and campaign contributor?

Last year, Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court answered a resounding “no” to both questions, overturning Gov. Tom Wolf’s 2015 executive order which would have forced unionization on 20,000 home care workers and delivered up to $8 million in annual dues to a union backed by SEIU and AFSCME—two of Wolf’s major campaign contributors. The Wolf administration appealed the Commonwealth Court’s decision to the state Supreme Court, which will hear oral argument one week from today.

Oral argument on Wolf’s appeal is scheduled for 9:00 am on Tuesday, November 28, at the Harrisburg Supreme Court Courtroom.

The Fairness Center will argue on behalf of its clients Dave Smith, who is homebound with muscular dystrophy, and Don Lambrecht, Dave’s in-home care provider of 25 years, who successfully sued to block Wolf’s executive order in 2015.

“Dave and Don look forward to finally ending Gov. Wolf’s unconstitutional attempt to disrupt their deeply personal working arrangement,” commented David Osborne, president and general counsel for the Fairness Center. “Many of Pennsylvania’s 20,000 home care workers are family members or close friends who neither need nor want union interference in their daily lives. Unfortunately, Gov. Wolf remains adamant in helping his union campaign donors capture millions of dollars in dues money at home care workers’ expense and in violation of the law.”

In overturning Wolf’s executive order, the Commonwealth Court stated in its decision in J. Markham v. Wolf (a similar case argued concurrently with the Fairness Center’s clients’ case):

“[T]he Executive Order is de facto legislation, with provisions contrary to the existing statutory scheme. At its core, the Executive Order invades the relationship between a [Direct Care Worker] and the employer participant who receives personal services in his or her home.”

The Commonwealth Court entered a permanent injunction of Wolf’s order, which is in effect until Wolf’s appeal is resolved by the state Supreme Court. Undeterred by the injunction, Wolf and SEIU quickly implemented a scheme to sidestep the court’s ruling and funnel $1.25 million to a new organization created by the SEIU. The Wolf-SEIU scheme required all new home care workers to attend an orientation program and be introduced to a union representative.

In July of 2017, Dave and Don petitioned the court to enforce its injunction and block the scheme, since it contained elements of Wolf’s original executive order. In an August hearing, the governor’s counsel called the provision requiring a union introduction a “mistake,” stating, “[T]hat [the provision], of course, would violate the injunction. Absolutely crystal clear on that. We don’t dispute that at all.”

The Wolf administration quickly backed off and agreed to suspend the orientation program, pending the state Supreme Court’s decision on the underlying case.

“Last year, the Commonwealth Court ruled that Wolf’s executive order intruded on the private employment relationships of thousands of Pennsylvanians and that Gov. Wolf exceeded his constitutional authority,” continued Osborne. “We are confident the Supreme Court will reach the same conclusion. Our clients’ private employment arrangement should be protected, not abused to benefit union leaders.”

Case Timeline

• February 2015: Gov. Wolf issues an executive order enabling the unionization of up to 20,000 home care workers. This would have enabled an SEIU-backed union to siphon millions of dollars in annual dues from home care workers.
• April 2015: The Fairness Center’s clients Dave Smith, who is homebound with muscular dystrophy and receives in-home care, and Don Lambrecht, Dave’s home care provider for 25 years, file suit in Commonwealth Court and requests emergency relief to stop the unionization scheme. The Commonwealth Court issues a preliminary injunction preventing Wolf from further implementing the executive order.
• October 2016: The Commonwealth Court invalidates Wolf’s order. Wolf appeals the Commonwealth Court’s ruling to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
• November 2016: The Commonwealth Court enjoins Wolf during his appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from implementing the executive order or anything in accordance with it.
• Early 2017: The Wolf administration and an SEIU-created nonprofit agree to a mandatory home care worker orientation program as envisioned by the executive order.
• July 2017: The Fairness Center’s clients petition the Commonwealth Court to enforce its permanent injunction and end the orientation program.
• October 2017: The Wolf administration agrees to suspend the orientation program pending the state Supreme Court’s decision.
• November 28, 2017: Oral Argument to be held before the state Supreme Court on Wolf’s appeal of the Commonwealth Court’s October 2016 decision.

Case documents

• Backgrounder
• Petition for review
• Preliminary injunction
• Commonwealth Court’s ruling invalidating Wolf’s order
• Agreement to suspend orientation program

David Osborne is available for comment today. Please contact Conner Drigotas, 844.293.1001, cddrigotas@fairnesscenter.org to schedule an interview.

# # #

The Fairness Center is a nonprofit, public interest law firm offering free legal services to those facing unjust treatment from public employee union officials. For more information visit www.FairnessCenter.org.

The post Wolf’s Homecare Unionization Scheme Heads to Pa. Supreme Court appeared first on The Fairness Center.