This June 29 Wall Street Journal article gives a brief historical overview of the litigation that led to the Janus v. AFSCME case decided last week. It goes on to discuss the tactics that Democratic administrations in states like New York and California are using to subvert the legal ruling. These include forced worker orientations, in which new hires are pressured to agree to join the union; allowing workers to opt out of the union only during a brief window period, as during the last 10 days of the year; and making it illegal for groups that oppose coerced unionism to obtain addresses so that they can notify workers of their right to withdraw from the union.
"When it comes to tilting the field in favor of unions, Mr. Messenger says, “California seems like they keep inventing new things.” The same day the court decided Janus, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a state budget with a provision that “the timing of the mandatory orientations is not public record—it can’t be disclosed to the public,” in Mr. Messenger’s words. An earlier law provides that “the names, contact information, of public employees is not a public record, and can only be given to a union.”
