A case before the U.S. Supreme Court could have implications for the country's growing labor movement. Justices will hear oral arguments in Starbucks versus McKinney today to determine if the bar should be raised for the National Labor Relations Board when it seeks to impose court-ordered injunctions on companies.

David Groves, communications director with the Washington State Labor Council, said the Supreme Court could further undermine the power of the NLRB, the independent federal agency that protects employees' rights.

"We already have weak labor laws in this country that have such minor penalties for breaking union organizing laws that companies routinely do it, and this is another opportunity for them to weaken labor laws even further," he argued.

The case involves Starbucks' firing of seven employees in Memphis during their union campaign in 2021. The coffee company says it rehired the workers and denies wrongdoing. If the justices rule in favor of Starbucks, it could make it harder for the NLRB to seek court orders.

Groves said the law states that workers have a right to organize unions in their workplace without coercion or retaliation from their employers.

"That's all fine and good but if the penalty's not significant enough, then they'll just go ahead and break that law and consider it the cost of doing business if they have to pay a fine two years down the road," he explained.

Groves said his and other labor organizations support the passage of the Protecting the Right to Organize or PRO Act in Congress, which would strengthen labor laws, including providing greater authority to the NLRB.


get more stories like this via email

The tragedy surrounding UnitedHealthcare has brought renewed focus on cost barriers within the health care system.

A group of Minnesota unions said a nonconfrontational but organized front paid off in recent talks to limit cost hikes for members.

This fall, unionized state workers in northwest Minnesota, who receive care through Essentia, were notified the provider would increase out-of-pocket expenses Jan. 1. In a tiered system, they would move from Level Two to Level Three.

Amanda Stegmaier, information technologist at Minnesota State University-Moorhead, said she was caught off guard, noting the change could have boosted co-pays by roughly $30 per visit.

"I was personally looking at supplemental health insurance," Stegmaier explained. "What could I do to stay at a lower cost level, because being a single mom and one-income household, there's only so much money that goes around."

Stegmaier, a member of the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, urged colleagues to contact Essentia about the situation. Regional members of other unions like the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees did too, and the coalition convinced the provider to keep the cost hike temporary. It goes back to Level Two March 1. Stegmaier acknowledged the issue will likely resurface a year from now but a strong unified message can have an effect.

State employees have the benefit of union negotiators but those involved said voices working together, no matter where their insurance comes from, and can reasonably articulate the plight of health consumers might be able to turn some heads.

Adam Kamp, business agent for the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, feels it is a key strategy in the current landscape.

"Health care's becoming increasingly corporate, we're seeing more mergers, more buyouts," Kamp observed. "In that instance, it took peaceful, collective action in order to pressure the provider to do the right thing."

Stegmaier stressed keeping costs in check is important in her part of the state, because it allows members to keep going to the clinics that work best for them.

"Good health care in this area is hard to come by," Stegmaier emphasized. "When you find your care team that you're happy with, you wanna stick with them."

With unionization on an upswing of late, experts anticipate policy changes at the national level will reverse worker gains.

The number of labor union elections in 2024 was the highest in more than a decade, continuing increases seen in recent years. The Biden-era National Labor Relations Board made union organizing easier, increased penalties against employers for unfair labor practices and expanded the definition of employees to include some gig workers.

On Wednesday, the Senate failed to confirm the reappointment of board chair Lauren McFerran, setting up the Trump administration to appoint a new majority.

Todd Vachon, assistant professor of labor studies and employment relations at Rutgers University and director of the Labor Education Action Research Network, said recently bolstered pro-worker policies are threatened.

"I'm going to anticipate almost all of these decisions in the past three years being reversed under the Trump board," Vachon projected. "We could be surprised but I anticipate them all to be reversed, because that's been the historical trend. And that's not just a Trump thing, that's always kind of been a Democrat-Republican thing."

There were 316 union elections in California in 2023, double the number in 2020.

Nationwide, more than 16 million workers had union representation in 2023, an increase of 200,000 over the year prior. Despite the recent increases in rates of unionization, it only represents 0.1% of the workforce. Unionization rates in the early 1970s were 10 times higher, when more than 1% of the workforce was organizing annually.

With unemployment rates low in recent years, Vachon noted organized workers have been on a winning streak.

"We've seen a lot of strikes and the strikes have been very effective at winning gains for workers," Vachon observed. "I think that's going to continue into the Trump administration, as long as the economy remains strong and the labor market remains tight, workers and unions do have a bit more leverage now than they have had historically."

Union density in the United States is near the bottom of countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, at around 10% of all workers. While the international average is 16%, some nations in northern Europe have unionization rates of 50% or higher.


get more stories like this via email

Some companies will have new rules to follow amid changes to the Illinois Equal Pay Act of 2003.

House Bill 3129 ensures employers with four or more employees give equal pay for the same or substantially similar work in the same county regardless of gender or race. Governor JB Pritzker's recent signing of an amendment to the law mandates an employer with 15 or more workers to include pay benefits and open information in a job posting.

Amy Sneirson, equal pay manager for the Illinois Department of Labor, sees the amendment as another tool as job hopefuls seek and consider employment options.

"This is pay transparency, which is what this idea is called, being adopted in states and municipalities around the country," Sneirson explained. "The efforts to boost pay transparency are because pay inequity, despite the existence of very great laws federally and in the States, have not managed to extinguish pay inequities."

The amendment also requires if the applicable employer uses a third party to announce, post or publish a job posting, the employer must also inform the third party of the pay rate, who must include the pay scale in the job posting.

Employers are responding to the latest mandate for job postings. Sneirson pointed out the Illinois Department of Labor has hosted two webinars since October and has another one scheduled in a few weeks for employers to ask questions. The attendance, she added, has been good.

"We've had hundreds of employers attend, and they have been just wanting to gather information I think so they can be sure that they're complying with the law," Sneirson observed. "For a lot of national employers, this is not a new idea. They're already responding to pay transparency in other jurisdictions, and they just want to make sure that they're doing it right."

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, most employees in the Springfield area are in the mining, logging/construction, manufacturing, trade, transportation and utility industries.