

The legislation allows workers to opt out of paying union dues and instead serve as free riders – meaning take advantage of the benefits that come from a collectively bargained contract. The lawsuit contends that amounts to an illegal taking of unions’ property and resources, since state and federal labor laws require unions to negotiate contracts and provide representation to the non-union employees at “considerable cost” to union members.
The lawsuit also Brown v. Board of Education as well as the 1st and 14th Amendments:
It compares the right-to-work law with laws passed in Southern states in the 1950s as part of the massive resistance to the U.S. Supreme Court’s desegregation orders in Brown v. Board of Education, with legislation intended to discourage membership in the NAACP — laws that were ultimately overturned in court for violating 1st and 14th Amendment rights of free expression and association.
In April, a Wisconsin circuit court judge overturned that state’s right-to-work law in a case that made similar arguments. That ruling has been stayed, pending an appeal to the Wisconsin state Supreme Court.
Related News
- New Jersey’s “Vote Labor” Push led by SMART-TD’s Ron Sabol
- Better Short-Term Disability Benefits Coming in 2026
- Leaders train to negotiate strong contracts in revised Collective Bargaining class
- 2025 Tentative Agreement Reached Between SMART-TD and Union Pacific
- Stand with Sister Nydia Sandoval on Monday!
- General President Coleman congratulates SMART-TD leaders, members on ratified national agreement
- SMART Transportation Division Members Ratify New Five-Year Agreement with 18.77% Wage Increases and Enhanced Benefits
- Union Leadership Meets with New N.S. Trainees in McDonough, Georgia
- CSX Asks to keep Safety Reports out of the Crew Rooms, Injuries are Up, Fatalities Continue, and Transparency is Down
- WE WILL NOT “SHUT THE !#*$ UP AND DRIVE”!