The recent Janus case from the U.S. Supreme Court held that teachers and other public employees can refuse to pay money to a union, unless the employee “affirmatively consents to pay.” Employees cannot be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment because their First Amendment rights prohibit such coercion. In other words, Janus requires unions to persuade employees to join. Unfortunately, as my colleague Erin Shannon explains here, unions are now seeking ways to avoid the impact of Janus. I am worrying unions may be demanding school districts divert money from student programs to replace the mandatory fees banned by Janus.

This summer 250 of Washington’s 295 school districts are renegotiating employee contracts. The WEA union has been threatening illegal strikes this fall as part of its strategy to divert funding meant for students for double-digit pay increases. 

Now that Janus is the law of the land, it is possible unions are demanding districts pay for the dues they can no longer collect. Yet school districts are required to use public funding to benefit students, not to fund unions. And unions are supposed to be independent of management. Accepting government funding to pay for Janus could compromise union independence.  

Unfortunately, most contract negotiations between school districts and unions are conducted behind closed doors in Washington state. As described particularly well in the Tri-City Herald yesterday, the public does not know what the unions are demanding of school districts. Union members do not know what is being negotiated by union executives. Taxpayers find out what they are expected to pay only after negotiations are complete.  

Let’s hope school districts are not being pressured to divert funding from student programs to unions. Making contract negotiations transparent and open to the public would expose such efforts, help everyone involved represent their respective interests properly, and let everyone know where the money is going.