Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Shakman was a reform Democrat. He and the other plaintiffs objected to the support the incumbent Democratic candidates received from public employees which were mandatory for those desiring to keep their jobs. Shakman felt that it was a violation of employee rights and free elections, and an abuse of public funds. [1] [2] [3]
Public employees, therefore had to be careful with political allegiances; campaigning for a loser would result in demotion, firing, or transfer, while neutrality could result in a stagnant career advancement. [1] [2] [3] Shakman, then an attorney, ran for a public position outside of the Cook County Democratic Party and lost. He was distressed ...
Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, No. 16-1466, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), abbreviated Janus v.AFSCME, is a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on US labor law, concerning the power of labor unions to collect fees from non-union members.
Keigan Thurman said in a lawsuit filed on May 8 in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois that his former employer, Baldovin Construction Company, discriminated against him based ...
Columbus city employee claims federal rights violations. Council OKs $95,000 settlement. Mark Rice. October 28, 2024 at 10:11 AM.
Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, 497 U.S. 62 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court decision that held that the First Amendment forbids a government entity from basing its decision to promote, transfer, recall, or hire low-level public employees based upon their party affiliation.
Here’s what the Texas penal code on execution of judgment states: TITLE 1, Art. 43.03 A court may not order a defendant confined under Subsection (a) of this article unless the court at a ...
conversion, unjust enrichment, restitution, the right to an accounting, human rights violations and violations of international law: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: In re American Realty Capital Properties, Inc. Litigation: violations of Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York