[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H1273-H1274]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              JANUS V. AFSCME AND THE IMPORTANCE OF UNIONS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I live in Broward County, 
Florida, where the Marjory Stoneman Douglas mass shooting tragedy took 
place nearly 2 weeks ago.
  I am here to talk about our teachers and other public sector 
employees, but I want to take a moment to make sure that people within 
the sound of my voice understand what is at stake here. To hear the 
messages of these valiant students, in the memories of their friends 
whose lives were lost, their teachers whose lives were lost, and also 
on their own behalf as survivors. Their message is clear that we need 
to make sure that we are preventing weapons of war from being in the 
hands of civilians by banning assault-style rifles; by banning high-
capacity magazines; and by closing gun show loopholes, and every other 
loophole, that exist today on background checks so that we can make 
sure that we take concrete steps to prevent mass shootings from 
happening in this country, anywhere.
  If anything else, their message is a diversion tactic, whether it is 
more investment in mental health or arming teachers. In particular, the 
idea that we should put more guns into a school environment is 
ludicrous to them. Their teachers already did everything they could to 
protect these children, and some of them lost their lives. That is 
unacceptable and something that we need to come together to prevent.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague, Congressman Mast, for 
taking a stand that was extremely difficult on banning assault weapons. 
I know that is not politically popular for me to do, but he deserves 
that credit, so I thank him.
  The Janus v. AFSCME case is a case related to public sector unions. 
Simply put, teachers and other employees would be dealt a serious blow 
in terms of their ability to organize, organize on things like the 
conditions in a school and how we can keep them safe, all the way to 
wages and benefits.
  Today, despite being more productive than ever, we have Americans who 
work longer hours for less money and fewer benefits. While working 
people continue to struggle, we have corporate CEOs, whether they are 
the CEOs of gun manufacturers or any other corporation, who continue to 
use their wealth to influence politicians and rig the economic rules to 
benefit the wealthy and the powerful at the expense of everyone else.
  A major part of this effort is a decades-long attack on unions. 
Unions increase the bargaining power of workers by allowing them to 
negotiate collectively, together, rather than individually with 
employers. Imagine how a single or handful of employees would do if 
they were trying to negotiate with a major corporation for better 
benefits and wages on their own. When workers bargain collectively, 
employers have no choice but to work with them to pay them higher wages 
and offer more generous benefits and better working conditions, like 
school safety.
  Big corporations and their overpaid CEOs don't like paying higher 
wages and offering generous benefits; so, as a result, they don't like 
unions. The latest battle in the corporate war on unions happened 
yesterday at the Supreme Court where the Justices heard the Janus v. 
AFSCME case.
  This goes after public sector unions to continue the assault on all 
working people. It is a blatantly political and well-funded plot to use 
the highest court in the land to further turn the economic rules 
against the middle class.

  When teachers, nurses, police officers, firefighters, and other 
public service workers are free to build strong unions, they win 
benefits like better

[[Page H1274]]

working conditions, wages, healthcare, and retirement security and 
safety that are given not just to union members, but to everyone in the 
workplace covered by the contract.
  I saw this firsthand, Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Graduate 
Assistants United union when I was in graduate school and I attended 
the University of Florida. Graduate assistants are the lowest rung on 
the ladder at colleges and universities, but are a linchpin to the 
success of educating college students. Having a union to fight for our 
wages was a key to being treated fairly by our university.
  Public sector unions have also played a vital role in providing 
economic opportunity for women and people of color. Given that all 
workers covered by a contract gain the benefits of union negotiations, 
it has been standard practice that all workers governed by the contract 
contribute their fair share to the cost of organizing, through union 
dues paid by union members and fair share fees by workers who choose 
not to join the union. Fair share fees don't pay for any political 
activities, just the collective bargaining activities that directly 
benefit everyone.
  We need to make sure that we continue to stand up for workers and for 
the middle class. I am hopeful that the Supreme Court will not side 
with the plaintiffs in this case.

                          ____________________