Lawyer says court decision helps Connecticut soldiers pay union dues

HARTFORD, Connecticut – A new US Supreme Court ruling on government employees and union dues is expected to help four Connecticut soldiers who say thousands of dollars in union dues have been withheld despite their choice of withdraw from the state police union, according to their lawyer.

The soldiers sued the Connecticut State Police Union and state officials in Bridgeport federal court. They state that their constitutional rights to freedom of expression and association were violated when officials took all union dues from their wages under the Law Enforcement Agencies Act. , believes that the decision of the US Supreme Court will help them to win their case and recover the money they claim to have been unduly deducted from their salary plus interest and possible damages A judge could grant. Union dues are approximately $ 750 per year per soldier.

The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that government workers can not be forced to contribute to the unions that represent them in collective bargaining, bringing a serious financial blow to unions. . The judges quashed a 41-year-old ruling that had allowed states to require public employees to pay fees to unions representing them, even if workers choose not to join.

The federal judge in the case put the proceedings on hold pending the decision of the Supreme Court.

"Forced unionism in the public sector in the United States is dead," said Young about the effect of the decision. "I hope we will be able to get a refund with interest for any money seized."

Soldiers chasing the state include Marc Lamberty, who left the union in 2011, and brothers Carson Konow and Collin Konow and Joseph Mercer, all of whom resigned in 2014. Lamberty and Mercer have retired since the filing of the complaint in 2015.

State officials, in court documents, have defended the union deductions as permitted by state law. Attorney General George Jepsen, whose office represents state officials in the trial, said he could not comment on how the Supreme Court's ruling will affect ongoing litigation.