Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-1466_2b3j.pdf
Page Number: 34

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

29 

Opinion of the Court 

desire  for  savings”  in  fact  “dr[o]ve  [its]  bargaining”  posi­
tions  on  matters  such  as  health-insurance  benefits  and 
holiday,  overtime,  and  promotion  policies. 
Id.,  at  13; 
Illinois  Dept.  of  Central  Management  Servs.  v.  AFSCME, 
Council 31, No. S–CB–16–17 etc., 33 PERI ¶67 (ILRB Dec.
13,  2016)  (ALJ  Decision),  pp.  26–28,  63–66,  224.    But 
when  the  State  offered  cost-saving  proposals  on  these 
issues,  the  Union  countered  with  very  different  sugges­
tions.  Among  other  things,  it  advocated  wage  and  tax
increases, cutting spending “to Wall Street financial insti­
tutions,”  and  reforms  to  Illinois’  pension  and  tax  systems
(such as closing “corporate tax loopholes,” “[e]xpanding the
base  of  the  state  sales  tax,”  and  “allowing  an  income  tax 
that is adjusted in accordance with ability to pay”).  Id., at 
27–28.  To  suggest  that  speech  on  such  matters  is  not  of 
great  public  concern—or  that  it  is  not  directed  at  the
“public  square,”  post,  at  16  (KAGAN, J.,  dissenting)—is  to 
deny reality.

range  of 

In  addition  to  affecting  how  public  money  is  spent,
union  speech  in  collective  bargaining  addresses  many
other  important  matters.    As  the  examples  offered  by 
respondents’  own  amici  show,  unions  express  views  on  a
wide 
child  welfare, 
subjects—education, 
healthcare, and minority rights, to name a few.  See, e.g., 
Brief  for  American  Federation  of  Teachers  as  Amicus 
Curiae  15–27;  Brief  for  Child  Protective  Service  Workers 
et al. as Amici Curiae 5–13; Brief for Human Rights Cam­
paign  et  al.  as  Amici  Curiae  10–17;  Brief  for  National 
Women’s Law Center et al. as Amici Curiae 14–30.  What 
unions  have  to  say  on  these  matters  in  the  context  of 
collective bargaining is of great public importance.

Take  the  example  of  education,  which  was  the  focus  of 

briefing  and  argument  in  Friedrichs.  The  public  im­
portance of subsidized union speech is especially apparent 
in  this  field,  since  educators  make  up  by  far  the  largest 
category  of  state  and  local  government  employees,  and