You walk by that tottering old tree every day thinking some day it is going to fall, and then one day, it is gone. Last week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision to free public workers from paying union dues is like that old tottering tree.

The 5-4 decision had been expected for several years, and according to Randy Perreira, executive director of the Hawaii Government Employees Association, public unions in Hawaii were ready for it.

Still it means a new way of doing business for public worker unions in Hawaii and threats to their power and relevancy.

The decision gives workers the option of refusing to join a union while still keeping the rights and benefits of union members.

In an interview after the ruling, Perreira said his union, the largest in Hawaii, has about 42,000 active and retired members; it is a potent force in local politics and a constant, influential voice at the Legislature.

The immediate impact, Perreira said, will be that new state and county hires and the 4 percent of union members who already have refused to join the union will not be billed for dues.

“It creates what in the jargon are called ‘free riders,’ where people would be able to say, ‘I no longer want to pay for the service, but I expect to get it,’” Perreira told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser.

Dues for the HGEA are 0.8 percent of straight salary plus a $13.40 a month national union charge for full-time workers.

On a national basis, union workers average 10-30 percent higher pay than non-union workers, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Hawaii is usually considered one of the top unionized states, although the percentage of unionized employees went from a high of 34.9 percent in 1976 to the current 21.9 percent.

The catch for Perreira and other public worker union leaders is to make an argument to a new group of state and county workers, the millennials, who need more convincing to join unions.

“The thinking is very different, I am not trying to ding millennials, but they almost take some of these things, the benefits, for granted without realizing that years before someone may have had to go on strike to achieve them,” he said.

So unions are going to have to start coming up with what Perreira called “value-added” programs, extra benefits or perceived worth besides what is won in bargaining-table wage increases.

Perreira wondered how to go about convincing 25-year-olds that if they are concerned about their retirement and benefits, it behooves them to want to join and support a union.

“Maybe if more young employees can talk to their parents or grandparents and see the worth of a pension,” Perreira mused.

At the same time, the political impact of the union is changing or evolving. Election-day marching orders are no longer going to be obeyed and the labor vote is no longer a sure thing.

“Today it is a far less-engaged electorate. People used to look at the ILWU endorsement list like loyal soldiers and they would show up and vote,” Perreira said. “Today is very different; we need to persuade and show evidence of why they should pick one candidate over another.”

Perreira knows the issues of political disinterest are the new normal, but he also knows that they are aided by an aggressive, conservative movement using the courts to hammer away union rights.

The results will be a diminished democracy.

Richard Borreca writes on politics on Sundays. Reach him at 808onpolitics@gmail.com.