For those who could not attend the January SHARE-UMMS Information Meetings, below is a summary of what we talked about. This is the beginning of a discussion among SHARE members that will continue over the coming months.
Friedrichs v. the California Teachers Association... what does this have to do with SHARE?
On
January 11, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a case called Friedrichs
v. the California Teachers Association. The ruling could have a big impact on
our union here at UMass Medical School, and on public-sector unions across the
United States. The Court will probably announce its decision sometime this spring.
If
the Court rules against unions, it will make it harder for public-sector
unions, including SHARE, to survive. SHARE members would have to decide
together if we want to keep the union. Over the next couple of months, members
will have opportunities to discuss what the Court’s decision could mean for our
union, and what we want to do about it.
What would
the impact be?
In
the most extreme case, the Court could rule that union members have the option
to decide not to pay dues or fees to the union, but still be represented by the
union and get the benefits that dues-paying members get.
Why
would a union still have to represent people who don’t pay to support the
union’s work?
Under current U.S. labor law, a union has to represent everyone in the bargaining unit
equally, whether they choose to join the union or not. For people who don’t
want to be union members, the law has allowed unions to charge an “agency fee”,
to cover the cost of the work they do negotiating contracts and supporting
members. Everybody pays because everybody benefits. The Supreme Court is now being
asked to overrule this law.
What
would we do if the Supreme Court rules against unions?
SHARE
members would have a decision to make together – Do we want to keep our union?
If
people can choose not to pay, probably some people would stop paying. If a lot
of people stopped paying, the union would have fewer resources to support employees,
and our strength would erode; it would be harder to negotiate good raises or
help employees with work issues. Eventually, we could end up with no union at
all.
In
1997, employees decided that they wanted a union here at UMMS. It was a big
decision – no one knew exactly what it would mean to have a union, they only knew
what it was like without one. And they voted to form SHARE.
Now,
we have a similar choice. Most people in SHARE now were not here before the union election. They are in the opposite situation – they don’t know what it is like here without
a union. Over the next couple of months, we will talk about the difference
between having a union and not. What would happen if there were no more SHARE?
Do the advantages outweigh the cost of dues? What was it like before the union?
Join
the Discussion
We will be talking
more about this in monthly Information Meetings, individual conversations, and
informal “Drop-In” times. If you have questions, or want to discuss this
further, please talk to someone who is active with SHARE, or call the SHARE
office at 508-929-4020.
