Despite Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto of the anti-privacy pro-union bill, lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last month to override the veto and enact the bill into law.
Despite Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto of the anti-privacy pro-union bill, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle voted overwhelmingly last month to override the veto and enact the bill into law.
The bill allows public unions to charge non-union employees for representation in labor disputes in an attempt to work around the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, which prevented unions from demanding fees from non-union employees. Additionally, the bill mandates that employers turn over private contact information, including cell phone numbers and email addresses, to unions.
State Rep. Shawn Dooley was the only House member to vote against the override in the House.
“My rationale is very simple,” said Dooley. “I believe an individual’s privacy rights trumps any organization’s wants – no matter who or what that organization is or represents. I tried to amend the legislation which would allow a person to elect not to release their personal information, home address, home phone and personal email if they so choose. Unfortunately, this amendment failed primarily on party lines. I honestly do not understand why the unions are so insistent on having the information of a person who does not want to join the union.”
“It is extremely disappointing that the Massachusetts Legislature chose the interests of big labor over worker privacy,” said NFIB’s Massachusetts State Director Chris Carlozzi. ”With labor intimidation tactics dominating headlines in Boston this summer, the Legislature should strive to uphold the Janus Supreme Court decision rather than erode it. Governor Baker sought a commonsense solution that allowed for reasonable fees to be collected while preventing unfettered union access to a worker’s private cell phone numbers and email addresses, but the House is instead seeking to side with union bosses over workers.
“This legislation will allow for intimidation tactics, like those used by Boston city officials, to be directed against public workers opting out of mandated union dues, who are simply exercising their Constitutional rights under Janus.”
