The Alaska Supreme Court has affirmed that the state of Alaska is not allowed to implement plans to make it harder for state employees to be a part in unions.
In an order released on Friday the court affirmed and confirmed a lower court ruling which found that the state had acted illegally when it attempted unilaterally in 2019 to modify the rules that govern the deduction of employee dues.
Five justices, ruling unanimously, ruled that the state was in violation of lawful requirements of the Alaska Public Employment Relations Act as well as the Administrative Procedures Act, as and the state’s guidelines regarding fair dealing. They and then upheld an injunction that prohibits the state from taking another similar case.
The decision is the end of a four-year dispute that is likely to resulted in Alaska over $1 million worth of court expenses The state is now required to compensate legal costs as well as compensation towards the Alaska State Employees Association, the union that opposed the state’s decision.
“We were expecting this however, it doesn’t make it any less thrilling or exciting,” said Heidi Drygas who is who is the director-executive of ASEA Local 52, which is the largest union for public employees in the state.
She also said that officials will go back to work following this Memorial Day weekend, but at present, “Today, we’re going to be celebrating.”
Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor described the results as “disappointing.”
“For the state the case is about protecting the First Amendment rights of employees in the public sector,” he said in the form of a written statement. Although the decision of the Alaska Supreme Court was disappointing but it’s not shocking because clarification regarding the Janus decision must ultimately be sought from the United States Supreme Court given the federal constitutional foundations. We hope that we will get precise instructions from this court to ensure that state policy doesn’t impede individual liberties.”
The case is based on states’ interpretations of an 2017 U.S. Supreme Court decision called Janus V. AFSCME.
In that case, justices ruled the state workers who aren’t members an organization aren’t obliged to pay a fee to a union which negotiated benefits for the employees.
The next year the next year, Governor. Mike Dunleavy — relying on an opinion of a lawyer from the then Attorney General Kevin Clarkson — decided that the decision of the Supreme Court was applicable on union employees, not only non-members. Dunleavy also required that state employees be able to sign up to union membership each year.
ASEA as well as the AFL-CIO brought suit to stop this action. A State Superior Court judge ruled in their favor, halting the Dunleavy administration’s rules -at initially temporarily before committing to it for the rest of the time.
Clarkson was removed from office due to an alleged harassing scandal however, the state fought the case in appeal to the lower court, appealing its loss before the State Supreme Court.
Oral arguments took place in the month of October 2022. Justice Dario Borghesan, a Dunleavy appointee, didn’t take the case on; senior Justice Robert Eastaugh was appointed in his place.
When the State Supreme Court considered the issue and the case was heard before federal court in Alaska and other states. In all cases the judges rejected arguments similar to those presented by state attorneys, declaring they believed that U.S. Supreme Court clearly didn’t intend for its decision to apply to unionists.
Alaska justices followed suit.
“The government’s definition of Janus is wrong,” they wrote. “We have joined with courts across the
A country has denied similar arguments and held that Janus was not the only one to compel
state’s actions put into Motion by the the Attorney General Clarkson along with the Governor Dunleavy.”
The justices decided that the circumstances of the case proved that the government was not driven to act based on First Amendment concerns, like it had argued against, but rather by a opposition to unions.
“There are evidences in the record, especially in the parties’ agreed facts, which support the conclusion of the superior court of the actions taken by the government “not neutral’ but instead were hostile towards ASEA We therefore oppose the state’s claim in the opposite direction,” the justices wrote in a majority opinion.
The justices concluded that the state had violated the law “by interfering in the statutory and contractual process of deduction of dues in a manner which targeted and dissuaded union membership,” they argued.
Drygas who spoke to the media via phone she said she hoped the state will now be able working with unions in fixing the issues that have hindered retention of employees and contributed to the understaffing of state agencies.
“Maybe we should appreciate the contributions they contribute to Alaska and honor their work in the future, instead of engaging in actions that constantly harm the employees,” she said.
This article first appeared in Alaska Beacon and is republished here with permission.
