Martin v. Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC)
Family home caregivers Tammy Martin and Dick Sullivan filed a lawsuit in the Michigan Court of Claims to challenge an unlawful attempt by the state to force them and thousands of others into union membership via the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Represented by the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, they argue that the state is violating their constitutional rights by misclassifying them as public employees to enable unionization by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The suit names the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC), the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO), and officials from both agencies as defendants.
The Mackinac Center Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit against the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC), the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity, and officials at those entities on behalf of two Michigan home caregivers, Tammy Martin and Dick Sullivan, challenging the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) attempt to be named as the exclusive collective bargaining representative for home care providers.
The lawsuit argues:
The legislature is overstepping its authority: The lawsuit asserts that 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.
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
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
“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.”
Tammy Martin, the mother of a 24-year-old son with mitochondrial disease, added: “Caring for my son isn’t a job—it’s my life. 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.”
In 2005, the SEIU engineered a dues skim scheme, collecting over $34 million in dues from Medicaid payments made to home caregivers. That practice was halted in 2013 following widespread public backlash and legislative repeal. Now, the union is attempting to revive this model after Governor 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.”
The lawsuit was filed in the Michigan Court of Claims on
Update (as of October 2025): Tammy Martin was previously a plaintiff in this case. Tragically, her son passed away this year, and she has since withdrawn. The Mackinac Center Legal Foundation continues to represent Dick Sullivan and others affected by these policies.
