Page 4 - 2018 Janus Toolkit CCD

Additional notable statements made by the Court in Janus include:

> Unions can be effective even without agency fees, without which designation of a public-sector union as the
exclusive representative still confers many benefits.
> Representation of nonmembers, even without agency fees, furthers the union’s interest in keeping control of
the administration of the collective bargaining agreement, since the resolution of one employee’s grievance
can affect others.
> Going forward, it would likely be unconstitutional for a public sector employer to adopt a collective bargaining
agreement that discriminates against nonmember employees.
> Individual employees who are not members of a union may potentially be required to pay for certain services
of a union, such as representation at disciplinary proceedings.

NEXT STEPS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR EMPLOYERS

1. Stop agency fee deductions

The Court’s decision in Janus is effective immediately, meaning employees who are non-members cannot be
charged agency fees. Accordingly, employers must stop deducting agency fees from the paychecks of public em-
ployees. Going forward, an employer may not deduct fees unless an employee clearly and affirmatively consents
to the deduction before it is implemented.

SB 866 creates a layer of potential complication because it modifies the law to require public employers to rely
on the representations of the union regarding an employee’s deduction authorizations. This likely leaves pub-
lic agency employers with at least three potential options: (1) stop agency fee deductions immediately without
communication with union leadership; (2) stop the agency fee deductions after providing a notice to union lead-
ership as to the employees who the public agency believes to be agency fee payers and whose deductions will be
halted with the July paycheck; or (3) stop the fee deductions after the union and public employer agree to the list
of employees whose fee deductions will be halted, and rely on the new provisions of SB 866 requiring the union to
defend and indemnify the employer in the event a fee payer brings suit to recover fees deducted subsequent to
the issuance of the Janus decision.

Public agencies may wish to have their human resources and payroll departments work collaboratively with
union leadership to confirm and identify employees who are agency fee payers and develop a strategy to ensure
prompt compliance with Janus.

2. Implement a communication plan

Public agency employers who have agency fee provisions in their union agreements should develop a commu-
nication plan to address the likely questions that will come from employees and unions in the days and weeks
following this decision. Specifically, taking steps to identify a single point person to respond to questions regard-
ing the impacts of the Janus decision will ensure cohesive and clear messaging and avoid the potential for man-
agers and supervisors to inadvertently run afoul of laws prohibiting discouraging or deterring union membership.
In developing these communication strategies regarding whether, and how, to communicate the Janus decision
to employees, employers should remain neutral and mindful of applicable law, including SB 285, which prohibits
employers from deterring or discouraging public employees from becoming or remaining members of a union,
and SB 866, which restricts a public employer’s ability to end employees mass communications about joining or
not joining a union.

Janus v. AFSCME Overview and Next Steps LozanoSmith.com