Right to Work Law: Impact on Unions and Workers - Essay Sample

Introduction

The “Right to Work” Law is an imperative rule which makes it optional for workers to go for a union at work. It also makes it non-compulsory for workers in the workplace unionized to make payments to the union and other membership fees needed for the union irrespective of being in the union. The law was passed in 1947 when President Harry Truman reviewed the sectors of the National Labors Act when he approved the Taft-Harley Act (Garcia, 2019). Presently, 28 states have voted for the law, thus giving them a choice to associate with the union parties. While the labor unions remain operative in the states, the law shields the workers by making the union fees uncompelled. This paper focuses on discussing the history of the “Right to Work” laws.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The Establishment of the Right to Work Law

Before the amendment of the Law, President Franklin Roosevelt signed the National Labor Relations Act in 1935, which permitted the employees to form unions, discuss contracts, and engage in employment actions. It also acknowledged the significance of the employees paying the fees to maintain their unions. There was a tendency among the American Labor Unions that required individuals already in the union to be hired by particular companies (Garcia, 2019). The law enabled the workers to join unions and improve their working conditions. However, the act excluded most of the workers to ensure they had enough votes to pass the congress. It was also regarded by many as providing the labor unions the excessive command over the work guidelines.

In 1947, President Harry Truman revised the sections of the National Labors Relations Act by passing the Taft-Harley Act. Contained in section 164 of the Taft-Harley Act, the law sought to create remedy of the perceived imbalance that favored the labor unions. It also outlawed the rule that one had to be a member of the union to be hired by particular companies. The Taft-Harley act also gave the states the power to enact the laws that prohibited mandatory union membership and fees (Eren & Ozbeklik, 2016). The employees were given the right to disregard the union representation. Today 28 states have executed the “right to work” laws.

The “right to work” laws were proposed by some members of the congress and passed by President Truman. The Laws were proposed over fears that the law provided more power to the union than the work policies (Garcia, 2019). It also led to the exclusion of most workers. There were also provisions for members of the union. The unions were racial. The establishment sought to prohibit the mandatory requirements for employees to join a union and to make payments.

Change of Effects and Purpose Since Inception

The aim and impact of the laws have varied since its inception. Critics argue that the “right to work” laws have weakened the labor unions for the past decades, mainly due to the increasing number of states adopting them. The laws prohibit the provisions provided by the unions to its members. There are no payments to fund the unions as the law outlaws the mandatory payments after securing a job and membership fees (Garcia, 2019). They also argue that there is much discrimination in workplaces and work-related fatalities due to unions' absence to negotiate for employees' contracts. Those who support the laws argue that it has led to increased employment among workers due to the right to employment without a dismissal for lack of payment of union fees. They also claim that no one is forced into a union. However, forcing employees to join unions is illegal under the federal Law (Eren & Ozbeklik, 2016). There are suggestions that the law also increases employments for individuals. There is also a claim that no one is forced to be in a union and pay subscriptions to advocate for the political causes that they do not support.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Right to Work Laws

The “right to work” laws are morally right. The law is consistent with the freedom of speech and association protected in the US the Constitution First Amendment (Makridis, 2019). It also gives the workforce the freedom to work with and without the labor unions. The forced fees abolished by the laws also violated the First Amendment. The laws are, however, worthy for employees and employers. The unions are disadvantaged.

The “right to work” law is significant to the employees in that; it gives them the capability to decide whether they are going to join a union. It also gives them the freedom to choose whether to pay union fees (Makridis, 2019). More jobs have also been created where the employees enjoy the benefits of exclusive representation. It reduces the chances of the unions to check with the employees while forcing them to join. There is also the labor force flexibility for employees. However, due to the lack of collective bargaining, there are many fatalities related to employment.

It is also advantageous to the employers as it reduces the financial benefit of organizing the workplaces where unions have little support. They also lower the risk of unionization, which makes the employees opt-out of the union and payments of the dues (Eren & Ozbeklik, 2016). Employers, therefore, do not have to worry about the unions' aggressive actions against the organizations. The corporate earnings also increase as the laws lead to economic growth, which allows the workplaces to remain competitive in the global market. Research shows that most companies are choosing to locate their facilities in regions that have adopted the law.

Further, the right to work laws are a disadvantage to the unions. They lose money when the workers are not compelled to pay fees, making it difficult to sustain them. The law discourages the employees from joining the unions as they still enjoy the advantages of representation making payments. It means that the employees in the unionized workplaces and do not support the unions can opt-out of paying the dues. The unions have also been weakened. Historically, they were powerful actors in US politics, both locally and globally, spending most of their money on campaigns (Eren & Ozbeklik, 2016). Therefore, the unions do not have enough money for the campaigns as most of the employees are opposed to their misuse of the money. Most also do not pay the dues.

Therefore, the benefits of the movement surpass the costs. Both the employees and the employers are advantaged while only the unions are disadvantaged (Eren & Ozbeklik, 2016). The unions also fail to benefit the members equally despite their equal contributions, which make the option to join and make payments admirable. The union only loses the funds paid by the employees.

The Future of the Right to Work Laws in America

Over the years, the Right to Work laws has seen a rise in popularity. It is supported by more than 50 percent of the American States. Soon the laws will become the norm in the US. States that have adopted them have confirmed job growth. The adoption is fast spreading with most republicans introducing the motion in the Houses. In the future, this will lead to almost all the states adopting the trend. The largest private employer, Wal-Mart, is also persuading its employees to not unionize and act per the “right to work” laws. The effect will see the adoption of the tendency in most organizations, thus obliging the states to adopt the law. The law, therefore, won't be going away for the longest time.

Conclusion

The “right to work” laws were projected by the associates of congress and passed by President Truman. They provide the employees with the independence to select whether to join a labor union or not. They also make it optional for the unionized workplace's payment of the union dues (Baehren, 2018). The law benefits the employees in that they may opt to pay or join the unions. It also increases employment opportunities. Besides, employers may invest without the fear of unions. However, it weakens the unions due to the lack of enough funds and members to support their activities.

References

Baehren, H. (2018). Opening Shops: Explanations for Resurgence in Right-to-Work Laws. Retrieved from https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/concern/honors_theses/dr26z252z

Eren, O., & Ozbeklik, S. (2016). What do righttowork laws do? Evidence from a synthetic control method analysis. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 35(1), 173-194. 5 Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.21861

Garcia, R. J. (2019). Right-to-Work Laws: Ideology and Impact. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 15, 509-519. Retrieved from https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-042951

Makridis, C. (2019). Do right-to-work laws work? Evidence from individual well-being and economic sentiment. Evidence from Individual Well-Being and Economic Sentiment (May 15, 2019). Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3095068