LIUNA Makes Case for Collective Bargaining, Files Amicus on Janus

Janus is a Supreme Court case, which depending on how it’s decided could impact the collective bargaining rights of public employees. The case is backed by anti-union, anti-worker special interests whose aim is to destroy unions and make it impossible for working people to join together. 

LIUNA, who proudly represents tens of thousands of dedicated, hard-working public employees, recently filed an amicus brief in support of collective bargaining. Oral arguments for Janus v. AFSCME are scheduled for February 28. Below is the introduction, but you can read LIUNA’s brief in whole by clicking here: LIUNA Amicus Brief.

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE

The Laborers’ International Union of North America (“LIUNA”) began as a union of construction workers, founded in 1903 by a group of hod carriers and related construction tradesmen who came together to secure better livelihoods for themselves and their families. Since that time, our union has grown to roughly half a million members throughout the United States and Canada. LIUNA today represents men and women working across multiple industries in the private sector, from construction to energy to manufacturing, and in the public sector, including employees who serve state and local governments and federal workers within the National Guard, Indian Health Services and other agencies. LIUNA represents over 85,000 public sector workers who, among other things, help collect our garbage, build roads and bridges, operate our schools and court systems, and maintain our water and sewer systems. LIUNA engages in collective bargaining and representation,  mainly through staff and members at the local union and district council (intermediate) levels around the country. We and our affiliates also engage in state and federal lobbying, employing registered lobbyists and bringing rank-and-file members and local leaders to Washington, D.C. and state capitals on a regular basis to communicate our concerns. LIUNA’s experience and familiarity with both functions, and our standing as a major participant in the Labor Movement give us a highly informed perspective on the issues at stake in this dispute. In particular, we can authoritatively attest to the clear-cut differences between collective bargaining and lobbying. Additionally, LIUNA has an interest in this litigation because Petitioner named LIUNA as a defendant in proceedings below, our union represents public employees in Illinois, the situs of this case, and we and our affiliates are parties to many public sector collective bargaining agreements in Illinois and throughout the United States that require the payment of agency fees.

Categories