The Right to Work Sates
Introduction
The concept of the Right to work States
A trade union is the amalgamation of workers that are joined together by the pursuit of increased pay, tolerable working conditions and protecting the integrity of the trade. Trade unions originated from Europe during the industrial revolution in order to provide bargaining power to workers who lacked the skills and expertise. Workers complained of mistreatment from the employers. A scrutiny of the history of trade unionism reveals that the employees raised legitimate claims on the relationship with their employers. Employers had an unfair advantage over their employers in disputes. The social and economic rights of the workers were grossly violated. In the early stages of trade unionism, labor unions were considered as illegal unions that were formed to slow down the output of the businesses and use violence to advance the interests of the workers. In the United States of America, labor movements have been legalized. They are considered as the legal representative of the workers in disputes between the workers and the management. Trade unions have represented the workers in court when the management cites cases of breach of contract. Large trade unions in the United States of America usually engage in the electioneering process and lobbying activities both at the state and the federal level.
In the United States, the number of the workers aligned to a trade union is lower than the European countries and Japan. Workers aligned to the labor organizations constitute 11.4 percent of the total workers. Workers who belong to a trade organization have reported 10-30 percent better pay than the workers who are not members to a trade union. The right to work is a statute of the United States of America that prohibits employers from making membership to an established labor organization a requirement for employment. The right to work laws prohibits employees from making the submission of union fees criteria for promotion or being used as a basis of retrenchment. The laws make the contracts between the employers and the labor unions illegal especially the contracts that are entered to ensure that employees become members of labor unions.
A total of 24 states in the United States of America have the right to work provisions in their constitutions or the in the state legislation. Majority of the states are southern or western states. Michigan and the state of Indiana have enacted the right to work legislation. The chamber of commerce has been lobbying states to pass the right to work legislation. The right to work laws enacted by the states are allowed by the 1947 federal Taft-Hartley Act. States make distinctions in the operation of the laws with some of them having the right to work laws in effect for both the workers from the private sector and the government employees. Arizona included the right to work laws in their constitution. Article 25 of the Arizona constitution addresses the provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act. Arkansas amended its constitution to include the provisions of 14 B of the Taft-Hartley Act in 1847. Indiana and Michigan were the latest states to enact the right to work legislation in 2012.
History of the Right to work state
The National Labor Relations Act covered the contractual agreements between the employers and the trade unions. It is the fundamental labor law in the United States of America. The labor law guarantees the rights of the Workers in the private sector to become a party to a labor organization. The act abolished some of the unfair practices by employers such as intimidating workers from joining a trade organization, dominating and interfering with the process of forming a labor organization. Discriminating workers in regard to employment and promotions and finally discriminating workers who had agreed to testify against their employers. The employers criticized the act for having a broad definition of an employee that encompassed the plant guards and supervisors. The National relations Labor Act received much criticism from the Republican Party. The Act was accused of infringing on the employee’s rights and fundamental freedom. The section that raised controversy was the clause that allowed employers to engage with trade unions to allow employees to submit the union dues. It became mandatory for employees to submit their dues to the trade unions. Failure to comply with this requirement meant that employees would lose their jobs.
The Republicans were not pleased with the National Labor Relations Act. The Act gave trade unions too much power to be controlled by the federal government or the state governments. The National Labor Relations Act unionized the business sector. Over 14.2 million workers had union contracts towards the end of the Second World War. . In the course of 1946, five million workers were involved in industrial strikes that lasted four times longer than during the Second World War. The Republican had vehemently opposed the bill in Congress. When it was, Republicans began drafting their own Act to alleviate the effects of the National Labor Act. Labor Management Act, also referred as the Taft–Hartley Act was drafted and passed by the Republicans. The National Labor Management Act was opposed by both the president and the labor organizations. President Harry Truman vetoed the bill arguing that the bill was a dangerous intrusion and violation of free speech and was in conflict with the core principles of a democratic society. The labor organization leaders from all over the United States branded the bill as the slave-labor bill. The bill was drafted by an anti-unionist Fred Hartley and was supported by business lobby groups such as the National Association of Manufacturers.
The bill abolished closed shops. Closed shops were contractual agreements that allowed the businesses to hire employees who were members to labor union organizations. The contractual agreements allowed joining the labor organization before they became employees. The new employees were given thirty days to join a labor organization or their employment would be terminated. The congress amended a section of the act that required the employees to authorize a Union shop later after the enactment of the Taft–Hartley Act .The Taft–Hartley Act prohibited employers from firing employees who refused to become members of Trade unions. Under the union shop rule, an employee is free to work for any willing employer without being coerced to join a labor organization or submit union dues to a labor union. The act also prohibited labor organizations from funding the federal elections. All the states in the deep south have already incorporated the clause of the Taft–Hartley Act into their state constitutions or enacted a statute that enforces section 14 B of the Taft–Hartley Act. A total of 24 states of the United States of America already adopted the right to work legislation in accordance with section 14B of the Taft–Hartley Act.
Debate
The proponents of the right to work laws cite the freedom of association to argue that employees should not be forced to join labor unions they are not willing to join. Freedom of association gives the employees the right to choose the people and the groups to associate with. The proponent of the right work argued that the non-right to work states advocate for forced unionism. In response to the argument by the labor unions that they benefited from the services offered by unions, the proponents of the right to vote argue that the National Labor Relations Act created a system that deprived the employee of the freedom of choice. Proponents of the right work argue that they should not be forced into a collective bargaining by financial organizations whose management they did not elect into office. Employees argue that they should be allowed to associate with the organizations of their choice. Proponents of the right the right to work laws argue that it is unfair for trade organizations to force employees into joining trade organizations by making them sign the Union Security contracts as a requirement of employment.
Reports have resurfaced that Labor Organizations collect a total of $ 4.5 billion in union fees. The money is channeled into unreported state and federal campaign operations in order to control the majorities in the Congress. The Labor organizations are responsible for the increased government and high taxes because they control the majorities in the Congress.
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled against forced collective bargaining. In the Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, the Supreme Court argued that employees who had been forced to join labor organizations were not allowed to exercise their freedom of choice were subjected to force instead of being allowed freely to join the trade union of their choice the trade union of their choice. The court further reiterated that the legislation was obnoxious because it gave the majority unwarranted to control the affairs of the unwilling minority. The legislation interfered with the basic rights and individual freedoms. It interfered with the basic rights and fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Due Process under the Fifth Amendment. The ruling was, however, overturned by another Supreme Court Decision.
The rights to work states have strong work policies hence the impact of the laws cannot be wholly established in the States. Thomas Holmes argued that it is difficult to analyze the impact of the right to work laws because of the similarities of the States that have enacted them. During the 2007 to 2010 economic recession, the United States of America experienced high unemployment rates and the collapse of business entities. The labor force lost jobs as businesses liquidated due to bankruptcy. The states that had enacted the right to work legislation experienced one percent lower unemployment rates. While the unemployment rates were ranging as high as 9.6% the states that had enacted the right to work laws experienced lower rates to the tune of 8.6%.
The rate of employer sponsored health insurance is lower than the in the Right to work states that the states that have not enacted the right to work legislation. Employers in the Right to work States do not exert undue influence on the private lives of their employees by covering their health insurance policies. In the Non Right to Work states, employees would be forced to become a party to the Union in order to get the insurance benefits.
Compulsory Unionism affects the economy of the United States of America. The Union collects large union fees which are channeled into areas that do not further the economic development goals of the United States of America. With annual collection of $ 4.5 billion in dues, those funds could be directed to economically viable investment schemes.
Labor organizations use the Union fees to venture into political activities. The total collection of all the private and government unions totals to $ 11.6 billion. The total collection is having almost doubled over the last three decades. The national Right to Work committee has demonstrated that families in the right to work states have a better standard of living compared to those families that live in the non-right to work states. Averagely, families in the have a greater after tax income and, therefore, a greater purchasing power compared to their counterparts in the Non right to work states. The Right to work states experience better economic viability than the non-right to work states. The National Labor statistics have shown that there is increased manufacturing and agricultural jobs in the right to work states. The right to work states experiences fewer employee retrenchments than their non-right to work counterparts.
General Motors is reported to have moved its production from Camaro to Michigan because of its Right to work legislation. Right to work legislation attract businesses and investors into the states that are bit marred by incessant protests from the labor Unions. The expense of Union dues and benefit compensation packages demanded by the Unions have driven businesses to other jurisdictions and reduced the rate of employment
The opponents of the to work laws argue that the term ‘right to work ‘ is a misnomer because states that do not have the rights to work laws allow their employees to work in order to earn income. The opponents of the right to work laws argue that that in right to work states employees benefit from collective bargaining advanced by the Labor Unions without paying for it. Opponents cite the freedoms of association by claiming that the rights to work laws limit the contracts individuals can enter into with the employers. The laws create a problem of employees who do not benefit from the right to work laws, but do not submit the union fees. Non Union members force the labor Union members to for the grievance services offered by the unions. The rights to work laws impose an artificial burden to the labor unions and, therefore, affecting the rates of the union’s fees offered by the members of the labor Organizations.
The right to work laws provides a downward spiral for the work environment conditions to nosedive. Because of the lack of labor Unions activism, the states that have enacted the right to work laws are drifting towards poor working conditions and low wages. Opponents argue that the right to work laws violates the freedom of contract and association. The wages in the right to work states are 3.2 % lower than those in non-right to work states. On average, an employee in the right to work state earns one thousand and five hundred dollars than a similar employee in a non-right to work state.
The rights to work laws are misleading because they do not provide a guarantee of employment or protect the employee from unfair job termination. A right to work law undermines the activities of the Labor Union hence deny the employees the best employment contracts under the union security agreements. The laws require the employee to benefit from collective bargaining and but do not allow the members to pay union dues to a labor organization. In the exception of Texas which recorded one million increases in job, the right to work legislation has been attributed to poverty, poor working conditions and poor health status of the employees in the right to work states.
Opponents of the Right to work legislation dispute the statics raised by the right to work organizations. They argued that, among the Hispanics in the non-right to work states, they earned $250 more per week compared to their counterparts in the right to work states. Right to work laws do not increase the economic viability by depressing the wages payable to employees and reducing the situations that the employer can enter into contracts with the employees.
Opponents of the right to work laws argue that the laws are meant to protect the middle class from economic oppression by the employers. They argue that the right to work laws regulate the activities of the union and undermine the middle class which is an essential component of the economy. A research conducted showed that sixty percent of the middle class received fifty three percent of the national income. Researchers have concluded that the right to work legislation has no connection with the rate of employment. The rights to work laws do not increase the rate of employment. They demarcate the society along the income earning lines. The laws depress the local economies and infringe on the freedom of entering a contract. Opponents of the right to work laws give a conclusive reason as to why President Harry Truman vetoed the bill after it was passed by the congress.
Conclusion
The freedom of association is an individual and collective right that has been guaranteed by both domestic and international law. The right is guaranteed by the Article 11 of the United States Bill of Rights. Under the international law, the right is covered under article 20 to 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The right enables a worker to join and leave groups freely without being subjected to intimidation or coercion. The right is manifested in the freedom to enter into labor organization freely. Employees should not be forced to join labor organizations against their will. It is unfair to union shop workers and in the event they fail to comply with the regulations, an employee terminates the employment contract. It is evident that there are many benefits that accrue from collective bargain. Employees who do not submit their union dues should not benefit from the collective effort of the Union Members.
Bibliography
Bresler, R. (2004). Freedom of Association: Rights and Liberties Under the Law. New York: ABC-CLIO.
Collins, H. (2010). Employment Law. London: Oxford University Press.
Jackson, P. (2007). Labor and Employment Law. New York: Pearson Education .
Reilley, A. (2008). An Actor's Business: How to Market Yourself As an Actor No Matter Where You Live. New York: Sentient Publications.
Twomey, D. (2012). Labor and Employment Law: Text & Cases. New York: Cengage Learning.
Ullman, V. (2013). Labor and Employment Law. New York: Thomson/Delmar Learning.
