The Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus vs. AFSCME could have major consequences for both New York’s state and local governments and the million New Yorkers who work for them.

A divided 5-4 court agreed with plaintiff Mark Janus that since all activities of public employee unions are designed to influence government officials and shape public policy, paying for them amounts to “political” speech that people shouldn’t be forced to subsidize.

Unions must immediately step up their game, because all public workers now have a choice about paying dues that regularly top $1,000 a year. For those who never wanted to belong to a union in the first place, the ruling puts this money back in their pockets. The unions will have less money to both elect their friends and threaten their enemies — that is, generally, anyone who stands up for taxpayers.

But what does the ruling mean for the fiscal future of the Empire State, home of the country’s most unionized public sector? It depends, as always, on our elected officials.

Government unions hold outsize influence over public policy, in no small part because of the now-invalidated law that made workers pay them as a condition of employment. Even the attorney for AFSCME, which stands for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, conceded during oral arguments that losing agency fees — which were paid in lieu of dues by workers who declined membership — will diminish its political influence.

Time, and future fiscal circumstances, will tell which of New York’s elected officials are kindred spirits with the unions, and which are just afraid of them.

Elected officials and union leaders tend to mutually reinforce their short-term focus, which doesn’t stretch far beyond the next term in office. Union leaders want to deliver the most wins for their members, and elected officials want to avoid facing union retaliation in the next election. This exposes future taxpayers and government workers alike to enormous long-term risks and liabilities.

Take the city’s underfunded pension systems, some of which have less than 70 cents available for every dollar promised in future benefits. Unions fight efforts to modernize the plans, and pressure state lawmakers to further sweeten benefits. Union leadership has gone so far as to prevent their members from having a choice in their retirement plans, blocking Gov. Cuomo’s 2012 push to let them choose a portable 401(k)-style option.

With unions now focused more on keeping members and less on menacing elected officials, lawmakers can now speak more openly about the city and state’s fiscal realities, such as pension costs that gobble up almost one in every six dollars the city collects in taxes.

Public employers across New York have separately promised well over a quarter-trillion dollars more in health care benefits for their retirees than they have saved for. Some upstate cities already spend more on coverage for retirees than on current employees. New York City and New York State each have unfunded retiree health care obligations approaching $90 billion. Responsible voices in government now have stronger footing to demand unions forgo goodies today to better fund the goodies they’ve won in the past.

Here workers themselves will benefit from more long-term thinking at the bargaining table. After all, they can’t trust future union officials to defend their interests in retirement when they’ve stopped paying dues. Thanks to Janus, city employees can better demand accountability from the people representing them.

The Janus ruling is good news for workers, who deserve to have a choice in supporting outfits as intensely political as government unions. And New York’s elected officials should themselves welcome this moment and the new chapter of labor relations it’s begun.

About the Author

Ken Girardin

Ken Girardin is the Empire Center’s Policy Analyst, performing detailed analysis of data and public policy in support of the Center’s research work.

Read more by Ken Girardin

You may also like

New York’s Subsidy for Striking Unions

Unemployment insurance programs are meant to help people who become jobless through no fault of their own. Nearly every state has disallowed benefits to employees who are on strike. But New York’s state Senate recently voted to let strikers get benefits one week after walking off the job—essentially putting them on equal footing with those who are laid off. Read More

Blame unions for New York’s pricey giveaway to Amazon

The state-city deal to bring one of Amazon’s two new headquarters to Long Island City might at least have provided New York City with another big benefit—a much-needed model of advanced, efficient building practices. After all, Amazon isn’t just a big corporation: It’s widely admired as a global leader in technological innovation. Instead, it appears the deal will ensure that Amazon is saddled with the same arcane and outmoded construction-union work rules and compensation levels that have saddled New York City with the nation’s highest urban construction costs. Read More

Janus v. AFSCME: What now?

Four months after the Janus decision, tens of thousands of New Yorkers are taking home bigger paychecks thanks to the end of forced union fees, having saved about $30 million in the last three months. The ruling brought New York unions in line wi Read More

Cuomo’s doomed pro-union tricks

This week’s US Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME was not unexpected — and neither was the agitated, high-volume reaction from Gov. Cuomo and the public-sector union bosses who are his strongest political allies. Read More

Governor’s Next Giveaway to NY’s Public Unions?

When Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently signed a bill making it harder for government workers to escape labor unions, he said it was just “the first step of the resistance.” Translation: It wasn’t the last favor Cuomo hopes to do for New York’s powerful public-sector unions in anticipation of the coming US Supreme Court decision in Janus v. AFSCME, which could void state laws compelling government workers to pay dues-like agency fees to unions they choose not to join. Read More

NY unions scrambling to lock up members before the Supreme Court gives them choice

A ruling for Janus would be a win for workers, forcing unions to focus more on treating their members like paying customers — and less on squeezing taxpayers. Read More

Janus case high stakes for public employee unions

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Monday in Janus v. AFSCME, a constitutional challenge to the dues-like union fees many state and local government workers must now pay. The outcome could shake the foundations of public-sector union power across the nation—especially in New York. Read More

NY’s disability pension gambit

New York City’s pension costs will reach nearly $8.8 billion in the coming 2016 fiscal year — more than double the 2006 level and nearly eight times the 2001 amount. Yet now, with a week to go in the state legislative session, Albany is poised to drive those costs even higher. Read More

Subscribe

Sign up to receive updates about Empire Center research, news and events in your email.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Empire Center for Public Policy
30 South Pearl St.
Suite 1210
Albany, NY 12207

Phone: 518-434-3100
Fax: 518-434-3130
E-Mail: info@empirecenter.org

About

The Empire Center is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank located in Albany, New York. Our mission is to make New York a better place to live and work by promoting public policy reforms grounded in free-market principles, personal responsibility, and the ideals of effective and accountable government.