Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Janus v. AFSCME, an attack by wealthy, anti-union organizations on the voice of working people and their ability to negotiate collectively.

People from around the country rallied at the Court to let the world know that, regardless of the outcome of the Janus case, we will continue to organize for the public good and for our rights. This followed the Working People’s Day of Action over the weekend, which called attention to our rigged economy and the need to defend our rights at work. It marked the fifty-year anniversary of protests by Memphis sanitation workers and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. against discrimination, low pay, and inhumane conditions that led to worker deaths. Share the graphic above  on Facebook and spread the word.

The AAUP supports the right of working people, including faculty, to join together in unions as well as in traditional nonunionized AAUP chapters. Our collective voice is a powerful force to set standards and create better workplaces. Together, we fight for higher education and the critical role it plays in this country. Together, we defend academic freedom, shared governance, and due process protections. Standing together also makes it possible for us to negotiate affordable healthcare, a fair return on our work, and the ability to retire with dignity.

At issue in Janus is whether non-union members, who share in the wages, benefits and protections that have been negotiated into a collectively bargained contract, may be required to pay their fair share for the cost of those negotiations. Learn more about the Janus case and the amicus brief we filed.

Yesterday's oral argument went largely as expected. Many of the justices sharply questioned the attorneys. Justices Sotomayor, Breyer, Ginsburg, and Kagan generally asked questions and advanced arguments that were supportive of the constitutionality of fair-share fees, pointing to their benefits and to the fact that unions and others had relied on the prior decisions of the Court. Justices Kennedy, Alito, and Roberts took the opposite approach. Justice Kennedy seemed particularly hostile, asserting that unions compel nonmembers to subsidize their political speech.

Because none of the justices appeared to depart from their expected position, today’s oral argument reinforced the view that the Court will rule against us.

AAUP members are sticking together as One Faculty, One Resistance to fight for our collective voice, to promote safe and challenging learning environments, and to defend the important role our universities play in advancing the public good.

Thanks for standing with us.

In unity,
Rudy Fichtenbaum, President, AAUP
Paul Davis, Chair, AAUP Collective Bargaining Congress

As you may have heard, today the US Supreme Court heard arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case that could have far-reaching consequences for AAUP members and for American workers more generally.

AAUP senior labor adviser Michael Mauer and associate counsel Nancy Long attended today’s proceedings. For the past forty years, the Supreme Court has endorsed the legality of fair share, or agency fee, arrangements, whereby nonmembers are obligated to pay for the costs of the representation that the union provides to all. This is now being challenged on the basis that the First Amendment bars this practice, since it compels individuals to pay for “speech” (by the union) with which they may not agree. Mike and Nancy report that the tone and content of the oral argument strengthened the apprehension in the labor community that there could well be a majority to overturn longstanding jurisprudence in this area. It appears that this issue will likely be resolved decisively. There’s a chance, though, that the Supreme Court will just modify the present methods of collecting fair share payments, leaving the basic structure intact.

If you are interested in reading the transcript of today’s arguments, you can find it here: http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/14-915_e2p3.pdf.

The court will issue its decision by June at the latest. We can’t know what the court will decide, but regardless of the outcome, the time to organize is now. The best defense against an unfavorable outcome in this case is a strong union with high membership. When we build our membership, we achieve better results at the negotiating table, represent our members more effectively, stand up to our administrations and let them know that we are a force to be reckoned with, and show that we are ready to fight for unions and for the future of higher education.

We have been in touch with many of you directly, and AAUP chapters across the country have already begun organizing and building membership. If your chapter would like assistance with your organizing efforts, please contact Jamie Owen Daniel, director of organizing, at jdaniel@aaup.org.

You can see more information on the case and on the amicus brief filed by the AAUP here. http://www.aaup.org/brief/friedrichs-v-california-teachers-association-no-14-915-2015 

In solidarity,

Howard Bunsis, Chair
AAUP Collective Bargaining Congress

Rudy Fichtenbaum, President
AAUP

The AAUP-CBC supports unionization as the most effective means for academic employees to protect shared governance and academic freedom, to uphold professional standards and values, and to promote higher education as an investment in our common future. Visit the AAUP-CBC website and Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.