Minnesota Lawyer
Rep. Mary Franson (Staff photo: Peter Bartz-Gallagher)
The U.S. Supreme Court will take up a case that could determine whether a push to unionize child-care workers in Minnesota moves forward.
The high court confirmed it will hear Harris v. Quinn, an Illinois lawsuit similar to one brought in Minnesota by opponents of an effort to unionize child-care workers. In September, the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals temporarily blocked a Minnesota law authorizing the unionization vote pending a Supreme Court ruling on the Illinois case.
A state law passed earlier this year allowed two unions to organize for an election to unionize child-care workers and personal care attendants in the state. AFSCME Council 5, the union attempting to organize child-care workers, is still in the midst of contacting the roughly 13,000 providers in the state, but the injunction blocks an election from taking place. The ruling does not apply to the unionization of personal-care attendants.
The Supreme Court ruling will provide some finality to the long tussle over the issue in Minnesota, which started back in November 2011, when Gov. Mark Dayton issued an executive order calling for a union election for child-care providers. A Ramsey County district judge blocked that order in April 2012, so the newly DFL-controlled Legislature passed a law last spring allowing the vote to take place. Republicans tried to block the vote on the House and Senate floor, resulting in nearly 30 hours of debate on the proposal.
Several lawsuits were filed by opponents of the law, but U.S. District Judge Michael Davis tossed out both cases in July. The 8th Circuit decision last month was heralded by opponents as a positive turn of events, as was Monday’s announcement that the Supreme Court would take the Illinois case.
“Our precious children deserve better than to be caught in the middle of a power grab by big union bosses,” former child-care provider and state Rep. Mary Franson, R-Alexandria, said in a statement. “Hardworking parents simply can’t afford the higher costs and fewer options unionization would impose on childcare.”
