Ingham Circuit Court Delays Immediate Effect of Public Act 53'S Prohibition Against Union Dues Deduction
On April 2, 2012, Judge Clinton Canady, III, of the Ingham County Circuit Court, issued a preliminary injunction enjoining the immediate effect of Public Act 53, which prohibits school districts from deducting union dues. Judge Canady ruled that the Michigan House of Representatives violated Michigan's Constitution (Const. 1963, Art. 4, Section 18) when it disregarded demands from minority members for a record roll call vote on whether Public Act 53 (and two other bills) should have immediate effect.
This legal development may be short-lived, since an appeal has been filed with the Michigan Court of Appeals. In addition, another lawsuit has been filed in the U. S. Federal District Court of the Eastern District of Michigan, challenging the constitutionality of Public Act 53.
Until there is a further legal development overruling or modifying Judge Canady's preliminary injunction, public school districts that have been making union dues deductions pursuant to a current collective bargaining agreement should continue to do so. Those districts that discontinued union dues deductions in response to the new law should contact their attorneys as to what course of action to pursue while the courts hopefully clarify districts' legal obligations going forward. Note that there is no obligation to make restitution to the unions for any union dues that were not deducted, in compliance with Public Act 53, before Judge Canady's preliminary injunction ruling on April 2, 2012.
If you have any questions, please contact your Clark Hill school law attorney.
Let’s Go Shopping: The Impact of Liquor & Cannabis on the Retail MarketExplore more
PFAS Restrictions: What Should You Be Doing?Explore more
Up in Smoke: Navigating Marijuana Laws in the Workplace
Employees’ lawful use of marijuana—both recreational and medical—presents numerous traps for the unwary employer. This webinar will address the various legal and practical issues that matter to employers and HR professionals when confronting employees’ lawful marijuana use.