The Buckeye Institute’s Robert Alt on Today’s Ruling in Uradnik v. IFO: Not a Surprise, Just the Beginning of Fight for Public Employees’ Rights
Columbus, OH – Robert Alt, The Buckeye Institute’s president and chief executive officer, issued the following statement after Minnesota Federal District Court Judge Paul A. Magnuson denied the motion for preliminary injunction in the case Uradnik v. Inter Faculty Organization, et al. Alt is one of the lead attorneys representing Kathy Uradnik in her case to end forced exclusive representation.
In The Daily Signal, Robert Alt outlines why forced exclusive representation is unconstitutional, and why The Buckeye Institute is fighting for the First Amendment rights of hardworking public employees, writing: “The next legal challenge after Janus will indeed come from these same so-called free riders, the non-members who demand the freedom to negotiate, speak, and bargain for themselves, rather than accept union representation that they do not want.”
Buckeye’s Robert Alt writes in The Columbus Dispatch, “Public-sector workers won the long-overdue right to be respected, irrespective of their individual decisions regarding union membership. And, in a nation founded upon the consent of the governed, the standard of consent adopted by the Supreme Court in Janus finally gives our hardworking public servants the voice and choice they have always deserved.”
The Buckeye Institute’s Robert Alt writes in The Hill saying, “More responsive unions funded by members who affirmatively consent and an abiding respect for First Amendment rights are principles that all Americans can applaud regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum. We are a nation founded upon the principle of the consent of the governed.”
The Buckeye Institute’s President and CEO Robert Alt: Janus v. AFSCME Decision a Victory for Workers and First Amendment
Columbus, OH – Robert Alt, president and chief executive officer of The Buckeye Institute, issued the following statement on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME.
This morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31. The case asks a similar question to one raised just two years ago in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association — namely whether forcing a public employee to choose between subsidizing a union’s political speech or being subject to termination for failure to do so violates the First Amendment.
Buckeye’s Robert Alt highlights the need to worker voting rights, writing in The Hill, “It is time for unions to embrace their democratic heritage and support their own members’ right to vote. It is time for all of us to join together to create more perfect unions. It is time for public employees to have a voice and a choice. It is time for worker voting rights.”
Every morning, hardworking men and women in every state drink their coffee and diligently go to work on our behalf—in our neighborhoods as public school teachers, home care workers, engineers, and in agencies protecting the environment. Unfortunately, while these civic-minded professionals go to work for us, the labor unions that they must join in order to teach our children or serve our communities do not always work for them...There is a solution.