Executive Order Forced Unionization Lawsuits Take Center Stage in Court

July 2, 2012
Cathy Ludlum, Plaintiff and founder of Connecticut Association of Personal Assistance speaking with reporters outside Hartford Superior Court.

Cathy Ludlum, Plaintiff and founder of Connecticut Association of Personal Assistance speaking with reporters outside Hartford Superior Court.

“We are all Cathy Ludlum and we are not going away.”

Hartford, CT – Cathy Ludlum (Connecticut Association of Personal Assistance or CTAPA, Inc.), Maria Nelson (Childcare Providers Coalition of Southington), Sen. Joe Markley (Southington), Rep. Rob Sampson (Wolcott) and Fergus Cullen of the Yankee Institute for Public Policy, along with Attorney Joe Summa (Waterbury) presented their case against the State of Connecticut and Governor Malloy’s Forced Unionization Executive Orders 9 & 10 in Hartford Superior Court Thursday, June 28th.

The executive orders set up the process for the forced unionization of day care providers and personal care attendants. The legislation merely granted the new but illegitimate union representatives the power to bargain with the state.

Related: Southington Observer – State officials back civil suit [PDF]


Cathy Ludlum, who has spinal muscular atrophy, employs a team of 11 personal care attendants. Cathy Ludlum said, “We’re very concerned that bad things are going to happen to us or our personal care attendants.”

The plaintiffs say Executive Orders 9 & 10 are a violation of both state and federal labor and constitutional law. They also claim that Governor Malloy usurped the power of the legislature after members refused to consider the matter during the 2011 regular session.

“Our side presented a strong argument and we have a good case,” said Senator Markley. “Personal care attendants are not state employees. I have spoken to many who share a good working relationship with their employers. They neither requested nor desire union involvement.”

The Civil Lawsuit was filed in Waterbury Superior Court March 23, 2012.

“A lot was discussed in court today about how the legislation that passed somehow ratifies the executive orders. This is misleading and untrue,” said Rep. Sampson. “The executive orders were and remain an overreach of authority by the Governor. The executive orders set up the process for the forced unionization of day care providers and personal care attendants. The legislation merely granted the new but illegitimate union representatives the power to bargain with the state. You can’t begin to make scrambled eggs unless you have the eggs to start with.”

“Despite her situation, Cathy has the strength to fight this injustice. We are all Cathy Ludlum and we are not going away,” said Attorney Joe Summa.

Attorney Joe Summa of Waterbury says he will file with in the next two weeks an amended complaint to address the new legislation passed during the 2012 legislative session that codifies the Executive Orders. Attorney Summa will also be filing by the end of the month, a challenge to the Executive Orders with the state labor board.

Judge James Graham said there is no timeline for a decision to be made.