Updated on Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 11:17
HARTFORD, Connecticut (AP) – A new ruling by the US Supreme Court on government workers and union contributions is likely to help four Connecticut soldiers who falsely cut thousands of dollars in union dues out of their paychecks, even though they voted it out loud the Attorney of the State Police Union
The soldiers have sued the federal police union of Connecticut and the state officials in federal court in Bridgeport. They say that their constitutional rights to freedom of expression and association were violated when state officials received the full union dues from their paychecks under the state's "Agency Dealing Act".
Their attorney W. James Young of the National Legal Defense Foundation believes that the US Supreme Court ruling will help them win their case and get back the money that they say is incorrectly deducted from their salary plus interest and possible damages that a judge could grant. The union contributions amount to about $ 750 per year per soldier.
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that government employees should not be forced to contribute to unions representing them in collective bargaining, which would cause a serious financial blow to organized work. The judges rejected a 41
The federal judge in the case of the soldiers had suspended the trial in anticipation of the Supreme Court ruling
"The public sector forced labor union in the United States is dead," Young said of the ruling's effect. "Hopefully we can get an interest rebate on all the money that was confiscated by them."
The soldiers who sue the state include Marc Lamberty, who left the union in 2011, and Carson Konow and Collin Konow and Joseph Mercer, who quit their union membership in 2014. Lamberty and Mercer have retired since filing a lawsuit in 2015.
Andrew Matthews, head of state police union, said he does not comment on pending litigation  Civil servants have defended in court documents the deductions of union dues as allowed by state law.
Attorney General George Jepsen, whose office represents state officials in the lawsuit, said he could not comment on the Supreme Court's decision (19659004) "However, from a broader and wider political perspective, it does not seem fair to some people who To facilitate the benefits of union representation without contributing to union support, "he said in a statement.
A lawsuit is scheduled to commence in September.