Public worker and teachers unions in Wisconsin are fighting to strike down a state law known as Act 10, which limited collective bargaining rights for most public unions. The unions are arguing that the law should be struck down because it creates unconstitutional exemptions for certain public safety workers, such as law enforcement groups like the State Patrol. The unions’ attorney has questioned why different classes of employees were created under the law and some public safety workers were exempted while others were not, raising concerns about equal protection under the law.
The Legislature’s attorney defended the exemptions for certain public safety workers by stating that there could be a public safety threat if they went on strike or had other job disruptions. The attorney argued that the exemptions were legally allowable and that the court should not intervene in the decision-making process of creating separate classes of employees under the law. The unions’ attorney countered that there was no rational reason for some public safety workers to be exempt while others were not, highlighting the lack of consistency in the application of the law.
If the latest lawsuit succeeds, all public sector workers who lost their collective bargaining power under Act 10 could have it restored and be treated the same as the police, firefighter, and other public safety unions who remain exempt from the law. The Legislature has argued that similar arguments were rejected by the state Supreme Court in 2014 and that the only change since then is the shift in control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court from conservative to liberal. The Act 10 law has faced legal challenges in the past but has ultimately withstood them, leading to a decrease in union membership across the state.
Teachers and other public workers involved in the lawsuit claim that Act 10 violates the Wisconsin Constitution’s equal protection guarantee by exempting certain groups that endorsed former Republican Gov. Scott Walker in the 2010 election, while subjecting others to restrictions. Assistant Attorney General Steven Kilpatrick argued that there are rational and legal reasons for differentiating between groups of employees and defended the state’s position. The state Department of Justice, overseen by Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul, is representing state agencies named as defendants and supporting the dismissal of the case.
Previous court rulings, including federal appeals court decisions in 2013 and 2014, have upheld the constitutionality of Act 10 and rejected claims that it violated the equal protection guarantee in the U.S. Constitution. In 2019, a federal judge also rejected a lawsuit brought by two arms of the International Union of Operating Engineers that argued the law violates free speech and free association rights under the First Amendment. The ongoing legal battle over Act 10 in Wisconsin reflects the ongoing debate over union rights and collective bargaining in the state, with both sides presenting arguments based on legal interpretations and past court decisions.
Overall, the lawsuit challenging Act 10 highlights the complex legal and political issues surrounding union rights and collective bargaining in Wisconsin. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for public sector workers in the state and could potentially impact the balance of power between unions and government officials. As the legal battle continues, both sides are making their case in court, pointing to past rulings and legal precedents to support their arguments. The decision on whether to dismiss the case or allow it to proceed will ultimately shape the future of labor relations in Wisconsin and set a precedent for similar challenges in the future.
