It seems to me that the Court gave very little consideration to states’ rights, particularly:
- whether the State of Illinois should have the right to determine which categories of employees it considers to be “state employees” and
- whether states – as employers – should have the right to decide whether they want to include “agency fee” provisions in their union contracts.
And I’m wondering whether the next SCOTUS decision will strike down states’ rights to decide – for themselves – whether or not to even have public employees’ unions. (Some states have chosen NOT to have public-sector unions. New Hampshire didn’t have public-sector collective bargaining until 1975, when it was established by Republican Governor Mel Thomson.)
Shouldn’t Illinois have the right to decide – for itself – whether the home-based caregivers that it pays with Medicaid money should be considered its “employees” for purposes of collective bargaining?
Shouldn’t Illinois have the right to decide – for itself – whether or not to include an “agency fee” provision in its union contracts?
Maybe I missed it…? But when I read through the decision, I didn’t see a whole lot of respect or deference given to the rights of the Illinois Legislature to set the employment conditions of the people it views as its “employees.”
Every time the New Hampshire Legislature considers a so-called “Right to Work” bill, we hear from private employers that it would infringe on their rights to set working conditions for their employees.
Shouldn’t state governments have that same right?