Another Lawsuit Challenges New Law Restricting Union Activities
While the law applies to a variety of public-employee unions across the state, unions representing law-enforcement officers, correctional officers and firefighters are exempted from the restrictions.
May 11, 2023 at 12:20 PM
4 minute read
A new law placing additional restrictions on public-employee unions has been hit with a second legal challenge, with unions representing city workers in South Florida saying it violates the state Constitution.
Three unions representing workers in Miami Beach, North Miami Beach, Deerfield Beach, Riviera Beach and West Palm Beach filed a lawsuit late Tuesday in Leon County circuit court, hours after Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the law. Teachers unions also filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday arguing that the law violates the U.S. Constitution.
The law, which the Republican-led Legislature passed during a session that ended last week, includes preventing dues from being deducted from workers' paychecks, forcing union members to make separate payments. Also, for example, it requires gauging how many eligible employees are dues-paying union members. If fewer than 60% of eligible employees are members, unions will have to be recertified as bargaining agents.
While the law applies to a variety of public-employee unions across the state, unions representing law-enforcement officers, correctional officers and firefighters are exempted from the restrictions.
The lawsuit filed in Leon County circuit court argues that the law (SB 256) violates collective-bargaining rights under the Florida Constitution. It also argues that the law violates equal-protection rights and unconstitutionally "impairs" already-existing contracts.
"SB 256 is an attack on the fundamental right of public employees to collectively bargain with their employer under [a section of the state Constitution]," the circuit court lawsuit said. "SB 256 prohibits employees from voluntarily paying dues via deductions from their paychecks and prevents their chosen representatives from negotiating over the same. SB 256 also eliminates the right of public employees to be represented by a union chosen by majority representation irrespective of dues payment despite the fact that Florida is, under our Constitution, a right-to-work state."
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Miami Beach Municipal Employees AFSCME Local 1554; North Miami Beach, Florida, City Employees Local 3293, AFSCME; and the Professional Managers and Supervisors Association, which represents workers in Deerfield Beach, Riviera Beach and West Palm Beach. Also, the plaintiffs include three union members: Carlos George, a fire equipment mechanic for Miami Beach; Judy Genao, an administrative assistant for the North Miami Beach Police Department; and Al Leal, a telecommunications superintendent for West Palm Beach.
The lawsuit is filed against the state Public Employees Relations Commission, which will carry out the law.
Many of the issues in the lawsuit are similar to allegations in the federal lawsuit filed Tuesday by the Florida Education Association and other teachers unions. The education lawsuit, however, focuses on federal—instead of state—constitutional issues.
Supporters of the law have argued that the changes, such as ending dues deductions from paychecks, would provide more transparency to workers.
"They don't know how much is being deducted when they start deducting from the paycheck," DeSantis said Wednesday during an appearance in Jacksonville. "What we are saying is that it's not appropriate to have automatic deductions. If you want to do it, you can write a check and hand it to them."
The lawsuit filed in circuit court, however, argues that issues such as dues deductions have been collectively bargained and are part of existing contracts. As a result, the lawsuit contends the change violates collective bargaining and improperly impairs contracts.
"The state has no compelling interest in prohibiting dues checkoff clauses entered into voluntarily between employers and employee organizations, and no legislative purpose for that prohibition is described in SB 256," the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit also alleges that the measure violates equal-protection rights because it exempts unions representing law-enforcement officers, correctional officers and firefighters. For instance, while George and Genao work for a fire department and a police department, they do not belong to the same unions as firefighters and law-enforcement officers.
The lawsuit said changes in the law "do not apply equally to all public employees or their unions. Rather they are selectively and arbitrarily applied only to disfavored employees and unions, while certain favored employees and unions—those that are certified to represent police, fire or corrections officers—are inexplicably exempted from SB 256's abridgements."
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Trending Stories
- 1Alex Spiro Accuses Prosecutors of 'Unethical' Comments in Adams' Bribery Case
- 2Cannabis Took a Hit on Red Wednesday, but Hope Is On the Way
- 3Ben Brafman Defending Celebrity Rabbi in Lawsuit by Miami Hotel
- 4People in the News—Dec. 23, 2024—Barley Snyder, Marshall Dennehey
- 5How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be a Lawyer First, Foremost and Always,' Says Matthew McLaughlin of Venable
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250