U.S. Supreme Court ruling part of broader attack on rights of workers
In a decision announced June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an attempt by the National Right-to-Work Foundation to drastically weaken public employee unions, but did uphold the foundation's claim that home health care aides don't deserve the same union rights as other workers.
The 5-4 ruling in the case of Harris v. Quinn places at risk a system of consumer-directed home care for seniors and people with disabilities that has proved successful in raising wages, providing affordable care and increasing training. Such care is in demand, with the number of elderly Americans slated to increase dramatically in the coming years.
After more than a decade of efforts by unions across the country, home health aides—who are not directly employed by state government but whose salaries are paid by the state—have been brought under the protection of state labor laws, giving them to right to choose whether to be represented by a union. The Supreme Court's ruling will undermine that right.
The ruling did not hand anti-worker extremists the victory they’d been hoping for, because the Court did not revoke collective bargaining rights for public service workers or care providers and did not eliminate existing contracts.
"That would have been a fundamental gutting of the American Dream,” AFSCME International President Lee Saunders said. "But make no mistake—Justice Alito’s opinion made clear that the relentless assault on workers' rights will not abate."
In Illinois, home care workers are represented by SEIU HealthCare, which issued the following statement:
"We are more determined than ever that joining together in unions is the best way for home care workers to ensure the quality care for which we strive. And we are prepared to work with the leadership of our state and allies of the disability community to ensure that we continue to have a strong voice for quality home care. History demonstrates that since we've had our union, the quality of care, stability of the workforce—due to better wages, benefits and cost effectiveness of the Home Services Program—have improved dramatically.
"We will not allow the tunnel vision focus of anti-worker extremists like the Right to Work Foundation—which brought this suit and whose only concern is to destroy unions—to diminish the quality of life for people with disabilities who have benefited from a solid home care program."
As always, AFSCME members nationwide will remain steadfast and fight for the simple rights and dignity that every working American deserves. A court ruling doesn’t change our obligation as proud union workers and it doesn't negate our obligation to keep fighting to restore the American middle class.