Tom LoBianco, writing for the Associated Press, reports that Lake Superior Court Judge John Sedia struck down Indiana’s right to work law under Indiana Constitution Article 1, section 21 which provides that “No person’s particular services shall be demanded, without just compensation.”
I haven’t read the decision, but the theory appears to be that requiring that the terms of union negotiated contracts apply to non-union workers who do not pay dues or a dues equivalent is, in effect, requiring the union to provide service without just compensation.
I’m not a fan of right to work as a policy, but unless there is something fairly compelling in that opinion I haven’t yet seen; I would bet against this opinion being upheld on appeal.
Doug, you have somewhat mischaracterized the constitutional holding by the Lake County judge, who I am told is an appointee of Mitch Daniels. Yes, it it unfair that employees who don’t pay for union negotiated wages and benefits are permitted to partake fully in them. What’s even worse, however, is the burden imposed by federal law on unions to represent all in a bargaining unit without regard to union membership or the payment of dues in contract enforcement and individual disciplinary cases. How would you feel if the General Assembly passed a law that said you and every attorney in Indiana had to represent anyone who demanded your services regardless of their ability to pay, and that you could be criminally charged, and fined, if you refused? I don’t want to predict how the Supreme Cout will ultimately rule in this case, which appears to be one of first impression. But I do think the burdens and risks the RTW law imposes on unions are entirely unjustifiable on public policy grounds, and I know that the passage of this law was just another part of the war on workers by certain politicians and business interests and had nothing to do with economic development policies or worker rights.
Thanks for the clarification. I simply hadn’t seen the opinion.