Don't be alarmed. This is not a case against labor unions, but a case for workers' rights. Individuals should have the right to choose whether or not they join a union. If an individual freely chooses to join a union and do so without coercion, they should have that choice.
Right-to-work laws guarantee people the right to employment without being forced to join a labor union or pay labor union dues. Right-to-work affords individuals a choice; one can choose whether or not to join a labor union after being hired by an employer. In forced union states, one must agree to join a union as a condition of employment by their employer. In some instances in forced union states, if a unionized employee fails to pay union dues they might be terminated from their job, even if they did not violate any of the employer's rules. I believe that forced unionization is frankly an anti-American, tyrannical concept.
The freedom of association is guaranteed in the United States Constitution. Although the words do not appear in the document itself, the Supreme Court case of NAACP v. Alabama outlines the idea that freedom of association is guaranteed by freedom of speech. Freedom of association guarantees individuals the opportunity to engage in relationships with people (and employers) with whom they choose. It also gives them the opportunity to form unions if they believe it is in their best interest.
Some who oppose right-to-work legislation argue that without forced unionization, unions would lose their power, therefore workers would suffer. Some also argue right-to-work laws encourage free loaders, meaning those who work at a unionized facility and do not pay union dues benefit from those who do pay union dues. I disagree with those notions. If employees think that unions are worth investing in, they will do so. Employees will choose to join a labor union and pay union dues if they feel it is in their best interest. Many people do, in fact, choose to engage in union membership, and that is absolutely their right. There are obviously many benefits in choosing to join a union, as those unions generally fight for higher wages, safer working conditions, and better benefits. That being said, if I wanted work as a dockworker in Washington state, I would be forced to join a union and pay union dues as a condition of employment, likely to the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU). If I find the actions of that organization reprehensible, such as storming a dock and taking six security guards hostage (which they did), I would still be forced to be a union member or risk losing my job. Based on my freedom of association which is guaranteed by the Constitution, I should be allowed to stop paying union dues and still be able to keep that job.
Those who oppose right-to-work legislation oftentimes argue, "If you don't want to join a labor union, you should find a job that doesn't require you to join." First of all, with unemployment at 8.6%, who wants to choose between having a job and joining a labor union? As another point, local governments have enacted smoking bans in public places in many counties and municipalities across the country. Many of these laws were written to protect employees at restaurants and bars from being subjected to second hand smoke inhalation. We didn't tell these employees simply to find other jobs if they didn't like the smokey workplace. Government stepped in with a seemingly sensible legislation so that Chef Tom at Don's Diner doesn't retire at 65 and develop lung cancer just a few years later.
I support both the right-to-work and the right to organize. Both are guaranteed by the United States Constitution, and they are not mutually exclusive. If we give individuals the right to choose their government, why can't we give them the right to choose whether or not to join a labor union?
No comments:
Post a Comment