Next week, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. If the fees were no longer required, more workers might decide not to join unions in an effort to keep more money in their paychecks. Rauner has contended that the fair share system violates free speech and that workers should not have to support unions they don't want to belong to. To keep my job at the state, I have to pay monthly fees to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, or AFSCME, a public employee union that claims to "represent" me. "When working people are able to join strong unions, they have the strength in numbers they need to fight for the freedoms they deserve, like access to quality health care, retirement security and time off work to care for a loved one," AFSCME President Lee Saunders said in a statement. Mark Janus is the lead plaintiff in Janus v. AFSCME, a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Illinois law that requires state workers to pay union dues or fees.  As a child support specialist at the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, my job is to fight for the little ones. Arguments in the case are likely to take place in early 2018, with a decision expected before the June adjournment of the court.
– Teachers and other public employees are now eyeing the Supreme Court after it announced Thursday it will take on a case next summer that may have big repercussions for unions. The Los Angeles Times reports the high court will look at overruling the requirement that all public employees, not just union members, pay fees that support collective bargaining. The case, being brought on behalf of Illinois child support specialist Mark Janus, could affect unions in 22 states where those "fair share" fees are now mandated for all public employees; labor experts think many would stop paying if they weren't forced to. With conservative Neil Gorsuch now on the gavel, it's expected the ruling won't favor the unions. The country's four largest public-sector unions are blasting the complaint as "a blatantly political and well-funded plot ... to further rig the economic rules against everyday working people." The case stretches back to 2015, when Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner filed a complaint saying the mandated fees were unconstitutional, per the Chicago Tribune. Three state employees, including Janus, joined the suit, which was eventually thrown out by a federal judge and an appeals court. The ruling used as precedence was the 1977 Supreme Court case of Abood vs. Detroit Board of Education, in which it was decided all public employees, even those not in unions, must pay a portion of union dues that go toward collective bargaining efforts, as those efforts benefit all employees. Early last year, Janus penned an op-ed for the Tribune explaining why he didn't feel he should be required to pay the fees, writing: "I am not anti-union. Unions have their place. … But unions aren't a fit for everyone. And I shouldn't be forced to pay money to a union if I don't think it does a good job representing my interests."