A ‘right to work’ law is a statute in the US that prohibits union security agreements or agreements between labor unions and employers, that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees’ membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring. In other words, if you are a union, you cannot ‘force’ employees to join the union or pay dues to the union if they do not want to….also, if a contract is negotiated for the union workers, the employees that are not part of the union cannot be excluded. You cannot threaten, cajole, coerce, intimidate, strong-arm any new hire, existing employee, etc. to do anything with the union. They are entitled, by this law, to refuse membership but reap the benefits of the existence of the union and its collective bargaining.
Does that make sense? I know I am a liberal progressive…quasi, socialistic and I agree with this law. I feel that no one should be forced to be a member of any organization within the confines of the workplace. I feel that each and every employee has the right to join the union…..or not, based on their individual situation.
Before Congress passed the Taft-Hartley Act over President 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 were required to be members of the union as a condition of employment. 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 outlawed the closed shop. The union shop rule, which required all new employees to join the union after a minimum period after their hire, is illegal in right-to-work states. A similar arrangement to the union shop is the agency shop, which employees must pay the equivalent of union dues, but need not formally join such union.
The term ‘right to work’ is a misnomer because the lack of such a law does not deprive anyone of the right to work; a right to work law simply ‘gives employees the right to be free riders….to benefit from collective bargaining without paying for it’. There are 24 states that have ‘right to work’ laws and 26 states and the District of Columbia do not have ‘right to work’ laws.
Various studies over the last 10 years have consistently shown that the employee in right-to-work states do not do as well financially (salary/benefits/pension) as those in non-right-to-work states. However, the difference is approximately 2.9% to 4.8%. The worker in a right-to-work state makes approximately $1500 less than the worker in the non-right-to-work state…..an interesting aside is that the unemployment in a right-to-work state is and has been lower than in the non-right-to-work states….again, consistently.
It is quite a fact that many employers will do anything that they can do to ‘legally’ insure the success of their organization (some not so ‘legal’ but that is for another BLOG…soon)….as they have every right and obligation to do. This law insures that an employee does not have to join a union if a union exists in their respective workplace but the employee will receive the benefits of the union and its representation. That is the law….
Speaking of laws…did you know that if an employee or former employee knows that an employer/former employer is doing something illegal such as stealing trust fund taxes, engaging in wage theft, falsifying MLS Sheets, falsifying RFP’s, breaking community laws, exhibiting violent behavior in the workplace, etc. that these are all practices that are protected by Whistleblower laws and that you and the information that you have is protected when you place that information on employee/employer internet sites such as GlassDoor, BLOGs, etc.
If you have any questions or need further information about the ‘Right-to-Work’ laws, please contact Rosanne Bennett at info@scbhrserv.com or 484-798-1236.
Does that make sense? I know I am a liberal progressive…quasi, socialistic and I agree with this law. I feel that no one should be forced to be a member of any organization within the confines of the workplace. I feel that each and every employee has the right to join the union…..or not, based on their individual situation.
Before Congress passed the Taft-Hartley Act over President 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 were required to be members of the union as a condition of employment. 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 outlawed the closed shop. The union shop rule, which required all new employees to join the union after a minimum period after their hire, is illegal in right-to-work states. A similar arrangement to the union shop is the agency shop, which employees must pay the equivalent of union dues, but need not formally join such union.
The term ‘right to work’ is a misnomer because the lack of such a law does not deprive anyone of the right to work; a right to work law simply ‘gives employees the right to be free riders….to benefit from collective bargaining without paying for it’. There are 24 states that have ‘right to work’ laws and 26 states and the District of Columbia do not have ‘right to work’ laws.
Various studies over the last 10 years have consistently shown that the employee in right-to-work states do not do as well financially (salary/benefits/pension) as those in non-right-to-work states. However, the difference is approximately 2.9% to 4.8%. The worker in a right-to-work state makes approximately $1500 less than the worker in the non-right-to-work state…..an interesting aside is that the unemployment in a right-to-work state is and has been lower than in the non-right-to-work states….again, consistently.
It is quite a fact that many employers will do anything that they can do to ‘legally’ insure the success of their organization (some not so ‘legal’ but that is for another BLOG…soon)….as they have every right and obligation to do. This law insures that an employee does not have to join a union if a union exists in their respective workplace but the employee will receive the benefits of the union and its representation. That is the law….
Speaking of laws…did you know that if an employee or former employee knows that an employer/former employer is doing something illegal such as stealing trust fund taxes, engaging in wage theft, falsifying MLS Sheets, falsifying RFP’s, breaking community laws, exhibiting violent behavior in the workplace, etc. that these are all practices that are protected by Whistleblower laws and that you and the information that you have is protected when you place that information on employee/employer internet sites such as GlassDoor, BLOGs, etc.
If you have any questions or need further information about the ‘Right-to-Work’ laws, please contact Rosanne Bennett at info@scbhrserv.com or 484-798-1236.
RSS Feed
