MIDLAND, Mich. — Family home caregivers Tammy Martin and Dick Sullivan have filed a lawsuit to stop an unlawful attempt by the state of Michigan to force them and thousands of others to join a union. The caregivers, represented by the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, argue that the state is violating their constitutional rights by classifying them as public employees to facilitate unionization by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
The lawsuit, filed in the Michigan Court of Claims, brings claims against the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC), the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO), and officials from both agencies.
“This case is about stopping the state from forcing union representation on people who never asked for it,” said Patrick Wright, vice president for legal affairs at the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation. “Tammy and Dick aren’t public employees — they’re family caregivers. The government has no right to assign them to a union simply because it wants to boost union rolls and bank accounts. Forced unionization violates their rights and undermines the deeply personal care they provide every day.”
The lawsuit argues:
- The legislature is overstepping its authority: Michigan home caregivers are wrongly categorized as state employees. Under Michigan law, only the Civil Service Commission has authority over state worker employment matters. While the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) currently handles payments, it is not the legal employer. If these caregivers are indeed state employees, any union efforts must be directed to the Civil Service Commission, not MDHHS
- Caregivers are not state employees, and forced unionization violates their constitutional rights: Most home caregivers are family members providing care in private homes, with no state benefits or supervision. Declaring them public employees is a legal fiction aimed at imposing union representation. In Harris v. Quinn (2014), the U.S. Supreme Court held that this violates the First Amendment — a mistake Michigan is now repeating.
Forced unionization comes at a cost
If unionization moves forward, home caregivers will face significant burdens without meaningful benefits:
- Caregivers may technically have the option to opt out of paying union dues, but they will still be required to attend mandatory orientation sessions.
- These sessions are often held off-site, forcing caregivers to travel and spend time away from the loved ones they care for.
- During orientation, the SEIU gains access to caregivers’ personal information and applies pressure to join, regardless of their initial preference.
- The sessions often feel like high-pressure, aggressive sales pitches, designed to push caregivers toward union membership, leaving caregivers feeling coerced.
- For those who do join, union dues will be automatically deducted from their state-issued stipends, even though the union cannot negotiate their wages or working conditions.
- A portion of the collected dues may be used to fund political activities that many caregivers do not endorse or wish to fund.
“I didn’t ask for a union, and I don’t need one,” said Dick Sullivan. “What I need is the freedom to care for my son without being forced into a system that doesn’t understand our situation and can’t actually advocate for what caregivers like me truly need.”
“Caring for my son isn’t a job — it’s my life,” added Tammy Martin, mother of a 24-year-old son with mitochondrial disease. “The state can’t just pretend I’m a government employee to justify handing me over to a union who doesn’t have any power to affect my rights.”
The SEIU operated this dues skim scheme from 2005 until 2012, collecting more $34 million in dues from Medicaid payments made to home caregivers. That practice was ended following widespread public backlash and legislative reform. Now, the union is attempting to revive this model after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed bills in 2024 that reclassify home caregivers — typically family members caring for disabled or ill loved ones — as public employees. This reclassification creates a pathway for forced unionization by permitting unions like the SEIU to seek recognition as the exclusive representative of these caregivers.
“This isn’t collective bargaining — it’s collective misrepresentation,” Wright said. “We’re asking the court to restore caregivers’ constitutional rights and stop this coercive designation before it causes real harm.”
For case documents and more information, visit Martin v. Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC)
