Right-to-work law

From Free net encyclopedia

Right-to-work laws are statutes enforced in several U.S. States, allowed under provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, which discourages collective bargaining by prohibiting trade unions from making membership a condition of employment, either before or after hire.

1 The Taft-Hartley Act
2 Arguments for and against right-to-work laws
- 2.1 Arguments for right-to-work laws
- 2.2 Arguments against right-to-work laws
3 Economic Information
4 U.S. States with Right-to-Work laws
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
- 7.1 For "Right-To-Work" laws
- 7.2 Against "Right-To-Work" laws

[edit]

The Taft-Hartley Act

Prior to the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act by Congress over President Harry S. Truman's veto in 1947, unions and employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act could lawfully agree to a "closed shop", in which employees at unionized workplaces are required to be members of the union as a condition of employment. Under the law in effect before the Taft-Hartley amendments, an employee who ceased being a member of the union for whatever reason, from failure to pay dues to expulsion from the union as an internal disciplinary punishment, could also be fired even if the employee did not violate any of the employer's rules.

The Taft-Hartley Act outlaws the "closed shop". The Act, however, permits employers and unions to operate under a "union shop" rule, which requires all new employees to join the union after a minimum period after their hire. Under "union shop" rules, employers are obliged to fire any employees who have avoided paying membership dues necessary to maintain membership in the union; however, the union cannot demand that the employer discharge an employee who has been expelled from membership for any other reason.

A similar arrangement to the "union shop" is the "agency shop", under which employees must pay the equivalent of union dues, but does not require them to formally join the union.

Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act goes further and authorizes individual states (but not local governments, such as cities or counties) to outlaw the union shop and agency shop for employees working in their jurisdictions. Under the "open shop" rule, an employee cannot be compelled to join a union that may exist at the employer, nor can the employee be fired if s/he joins the union. In other words, the employee has the "right to work", whether as a union member or not.

The Federal Government operates under "open shop" rules nationwide, although many of its employees are represented by unions. Conversely, professional sports leagues (regardless of where a team is located) operate under "union shop" rules.

[edit]

Arguments for and against right-to-work laws

[edit]

Arguments for right-to-work laws

Proponents of right-to-work laws point to the Constitutional right to freedom of association, as well as the common-law principle of private ownership of property. They argue that workers should be free both to join unions and to refrain from joining unions and, for this reason often refer to non-right-to-work states as "forced-union" states.

Proponents also point to the advantage of a more efficient labor market, with more competitive businesses and better economic growth as a result. (See Economic Information below.)

[edit]

Arguments against right-to-work laws

Opponents of right-to-work laws argue that the ability of non-union employees to benefit from collective bargaining without paying dues-- as a result of Federal labor laws mandating union representation of the entire "bargaining unit", regardless of whether all of these employees are dues-paying members or not-- creates a free rider problem, allowing employees to leave (or not join) a union while still ostensibly benefiting from the actions of that union, thus making union activities less sustainable. (Levels of unionization are typically much lower in right-to-work states.) For these reasons, they often refer to non-right-to-work states as "free collective bargaining" states. Opponents also argue that the laws prevent free contracts between unions and business owners, making it harder for unions to organize and less attractive for people to join a union. They call these laws "right-to-work-for-less" or "right-to-shirk" laws.

Opponents further argue that because unions are weakened by these laws, wages are lowered and worker safety and health is endangered. They cite statistics from the United States Department of Labor showing, for example, that in 2003 the rate of workplace fatalities per 100,000 workers was highest in right-to-work states. 19 of the top 25 states for worker fatality rates were right-to-work states, while 3 of the bottom 25 states were right-to-work states. A study in 2001 showed that workers in right-to-work states earned an average of 6.5% less (4% after controlling for regional costs of living) than their counterparts in states without the law.Template:Ref

Some Libertarians also argue that such laws restrict the right of employer and union to freely bargain a contract.

[edit]

Economic Information

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, from 1993-2003 the percentage change in non-farm private sector employees was 17.7% growth overall. The change in Right to Work States was 24.1% growth, while the change in "union shop" States was 14.2% growth.

According to the United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, from 1993-2003 the percentage change in real personal income was 29% growth overall. The change in Right to Work States was 37% growth, while the change in "union shop" States was 26% growth.

According to the United States Census Bureau, from 1982-2001 the percentage change in manufacturing establishments was 1.5% loss overall. The change in Right to Work States was 7% growth, while the change in "union shop" States was 4.9% loss.

Also according to the U.S. Census Bureau, from 1993-2003 the percentage growth of people covered by private health insurance was 8.5% growth. The change in Right to Work States was 13.6% growth, while the change in "union-shop" States was 5.9% growth.

According to both the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau, from 1991-2001 the percentage change in real value added per production worker was 11.1% growth overall. The change in Right to Work States was 17.1% growth, while the change in "union-shop" states was 8.4% growth.

Such statistics can be misleading, however, because they do not take into account all the possible reasons for the differences. For example, the departure of high-paying industrial work from "union-shop" states to right-to-work states would decrease real wages, etc. in the "union-shop" states, and consequently increase them in right-to-work states. Such disparities are not necessarily due to the ineffectiveness of unions, but may be due to ownership attempts to leave or otherwise generally avoid "union-shop" states in favor of right-to-work states, in which they can pay lower wages, increase the number of anti-union employees (thus preventing a union from successfully organizing, or in some cases getting support for a union decertification election), and/or institute its own work rules in lieu of what it may consider "restrictive" union work rules.

[edit]