Opinion
Law & Courts Opinion

The Supreme Court’s Decision on Union Dues Will Have Profound Consequences

By Celine McNicholas — June 27, 2018 3 min read
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. reads the court's 5-4 majority decision in Janus v AFSCME on June 27.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Council 31. Overturning decades of precedent, the court held that union fees violate “the free speech rights of nonmembers by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern.”

There is no question that today’s opinion will have profound effects for the 17.3 million men and women who work in state and local government service jobs. Without the ability to collect fair-share fees for the services they provide to nonmembers, state and local government unions will see their funding diminished—and workers will see their collective bargaining power weakened, which may lead to greater instability in state and local government workforces.

However, the impact of the case goes even further. The effects will be felt throughout our communities. Critical public services will be affected, with the potential impact on education systems particularly concerning.

Workers in education make up more than half of all state and local government workers. There are more than 8.8 million men and women employed in state and local education—6.9 million of whom work in elementary and secondary schools. Fully half of these workers are represented by a union. Union and nonunion workers alike count on unions to raise their wages and ensure strong labor standards. Today’s decision will affect whether public education jobs are good jobs, with wages and benefits that enable the men and women who educate and care for our children to support their families.

Teachers already earn less than comparable workers—earning, on average, just 77 percent what other college graduates earn in weekly wages. In fact, in no state are teachers paid more than other college graduates on average. Coupled with the dramatic cuts many states have enacted to education investments, this pay inequity is proof that our nation’s education workforce needs access to tools like collective bargaining to protect the quality of their jobs and, with them, the public education system overall.

We’ve already seen the consequences of undercutting teachers’ right to collective bargaining. In 2011, Wisconsin’s Act 10 eliminated collective bargaining rights for most state and local government workers. After the law passed, teacher turnover accelerated, and teacher experience shrank; the percentage of teachers with less than five years of experience rose from 19.6 percent in the 2010-2011 school year to 24.1 percent in the 2015-2016 school year. Even more troubling, the percentage of teachers who left the profession increased dramatically. There is already a lack of qualified, experienced teachers in many parts of the country. Undercutting teachers’ ability to earn a decent living will not improve the situation.

The recent teachers’ strikes in states including Oklahoma and West Virginia provide important examples of the instability that could arise in the wake of Janus. Because the laws in these states don’t give teachers strong collective bargaining rights, strikes are one of the only ways that workers have to make their voices heard. But these strikes have been about more than teachers’ wages and benefits. States have enacted budget cutbacks that have led to students being forced to use outdated textbooks, learning in classrooms without air conditioning and heat, and even—in the case of some school districts in Oklahoma—attending school for only four days a week.

During the walkouts, teachers advocated for increased investment in schools and against measures to provide tax breaks to the wealthiest residents while slashing public education budgets. Many of the men and women who stand to be most immediately affected by today’s decision have been on the front lines of these battles advocating for states to value education and invest adequate resources in our nation’s schools.

The long-term impacts of the Janus decision will be examined in the coming months. But, what is already clear is that the decision will have a significant impact on our nation’s state and local government workforce and the critical services they provide our communities. The two groups that stand to be the most affected are our nation’s public school teachers and our children who depend on the public school systems.

Events

Reading & Literacy K-12 Essentials Forum Supporting Struggling Readers in Middle and High School
Join this free virtual event to learn more about policy, data, research, and experiences around supporting older students who struggle to read.
School & District Management Webinar Squeeze More Learning Time Out of the School Day
Learn how to increase learning time for your students by identifying and minimizing classroom disruptions.
Recruitment & Retention Webinar EdRecruiter 2026 Survey Results: How School Districts are Finding and Keeping Talent
Discover the latest K-12 hiring trends from EdWeek’s nationwide survey of job seekers and district HR professionals.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Supreme Court to Weigh Birthright Citizenship. Why It Matters to Schools
The justices will review President Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship, a move that could affect schools.
4 min read
President Donald Trump signs an executive order on birthright citizenship in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, Jan. 20, 2025, in Washington.
President Donald Trump signs an executive order to on birthright citizenship in the Oval Office on Jan. 20, 2025. The U.S. Supreme Court will consider the legality of Trump's effort to limit birthright citizenship, another immigration policy that could affect schools.
Evan Vucci/AP
Law & Courts 20 States Push Back as Ed. Dept. Hands Programs to Other Agencies
The Trump admin. says it wants to prove that moving programs out of the Ed. Dept. can work long-term.
4 min read
Education Secretary Linda McMahon appears before the House Appropriation Panel about the 2026 budget in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 2025.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon appears before a U.S. House of Representatives panel in Washington on May 21, 2025. McMahon's agency has inked seven agreements shifting core functions, including Title I for K-12 schools, to other federal agencies. Those moves, announced in November, have now drawn a legal challenge.
Jason Andrew for Education Week
Law & Courts A New Twist in the Legal Battle Over Trump's Cancellation of Teacher-Prep Grants
A district court judge says she'll decide if the Trump administration broke the law.
4 min read
Instructional coach Kristi Tucker posts notes to the board during a team meeting at Ford Elementary School in Laurens, S.C., on March 10, 2025.
Instructional coach Kristi Tucker posts notes to the board during a team meeting at Ford Elementary School in Laurens, S.C., on March 10, 2025. The grant funding this training work was among three teacher-preparation grant programs largely terminated by the Trump administration in its first weeks. Eight states filed a lawsuit challenging terminations in two of those programs, and a judge on Thursday said she couldn't restore the discontinued grants but could rule on whether the Trump administration acted legally.
Bryant Kirk White for Education Week
Law & Courts Appeals Court Sides With Parent Group in Fight Over Ohio School District’s Pronoun Policy
The school system can't bar students from using gender-related language deemed offensive by others.
3 min read
The Ohio statehouse in Columbus is shown on April 15, 2024. An appeals court ruling has uncertain implications for districts across the state.
The Ohio statehouse in Columbus is shown on April 15, 2024. An appeals court ruling has uncertain implications for districts across the state.
Carolyn Kaster/AP