Right to Work

...

Study, Minnesota could have ranked among the top ten states with the highest income per capita thanks to the Right to Work law. However, because they chose not to adopt this law, they are now ranked 14th”. In another study also done by Dr. Veddar, Right to Work states employment ratio is 14 percent higher than non-Right to Work sates.

Another argument on the side of the proponents is that unions are already in a decline. Some feel that the states that are non-Right to Work are only trying to continue a union based system that really is not needed in today’s world. Although supporters of right to work claim it to be an economic benefit to their state, those statistics can vary from year to year. It is hard to prove that Right to Work creates jobs when the nation’s economy as a whole is still on the mend.

Just as there are arguments supporting RTW (Right to Work), there are also arguments from those opposing it. One of the biggest arguments is the fact that RTW creates a “free-loading” environment. Free-loaders are what the union refers to as people who are looking to get a free ride on the benefits and representation of the union, while not having to pay the union fees. This can cause a financial hardship for unions. A local union member from the state of Wisconsin says that it costs the union money anytime it has to represent an employee for a grievance, a complaint raised by the employee regarding work related issues. Some of the expenses that go into resolving a grievance are the time the union steward or committee man has to take away from his normal working hours to fight for the employee. It also costs unions money if a grievance has to go to arbitration, as they have lawyer fees, arbitrator fees and, depending on where the arbitration is held, costs for the accommodations. The same goes for contract negotiations as these need to be done off site from the company as well as the union. Because the RTW states the union must represent any paying or non-paying worker, if the non paying worker feels he was not justly represented, he can take his case to the NLRB and sue both the union and the union representative, which in turn could cost the union even more money

Another argument is one that counters the supporter’s stance on wages. According to the AFL-CIO (3), workers in RTW states make almost $5900 less than those workers in a state without RTW laws. With less investment into the education of workers, RTW states may see more job creation, however 26% of those jobs are considered to be low-paying.

Opponents of the RTW also say that work place injury and death rates have increased due to RTW. Along with lower wages are the less-than-adequate benefits. Because benefits are something that the union negotiates for during contract talks, companies are only obligated to provide what is required by law. With lower wages and less-than-adequate benefits, workers could essentially go uninsured due to the costs of insurance. It is because of these reasons that the opposing side states that the poverty level of RTW states will increase through the years.

Many states have already begun to see a drop in union membership since their state adopted some form of RTW, except for the states of Oklahoma and Nevada, who have actually seen a positive in union membership. For the state of Wisconsin, it is still too early to tell what the effect on union membership will be. In the diagram below, you can see the drop in union membership on both the state level as well as the national level.

Idaho Oklahoma Indiana Michigan

Year RTW became effective 1985 2001 2012 2013

Union membership before RTW (yr. prior to RTW) 9% 6.8% 11.2% 16.6%

Membership as of 2013 4.7% 7.5% 9.3% 16.3%

Change in membership -47% +10% -17% -1.8%

Change in national membership -40% -17% -5% -5%

As stated previously, it is too early to tell the effects of RTW in the state of Wisconsin as a whole. However, the effects on the unions themselves are beginning to be felt. The law went into effect two days after Governor Walker signed the bill. This means that any union that had their contract expire after March of 2015 are now trying to figure out how they can keep their memberships at the levels they need to stay afloat. One effect that has been seen is that the unions who are in the middle of contract negations have been driven to strike. Many feel that the companies are giving low-ball offers on the issues of wages and benefits because of RTW. Those whose contracts were already ratified prior to the signing will not know the effects until either their contract is up for renewal or if for some reason they need to amend their contract. The reason for this is because contract law supersedes the RTW law. This is the case for the Steele Workers of local 1343.

Once the RTW goes into effect for those unions whose contracts were previously ratified, it could take a few months after the new contract is negotiated before a change in membership can be seen. Even though RTW work gives employees the choice, they cannot simply drop out of a union once the new contract goes into effect because there are certain guidelines that need to be followed. For the local 1343, the employee has to give authorization for the company to withdraw union dues from their paychecks. Once the employee has given signed authorization, it cannot be canceled until the following year. Even then it is the employee’s responsibility to notify both the company and the union in writing within 15 days of either the expiration of the authorization or 15 days after the collective bargaining agreement expires.

Once an employee drops out of the union they also give up their voting rights. However, it should be made known that even though the employee drops out they still have the right to rejoin within the terms and guidelines set by the union. A concern that some union members have is that employees will choose to opt out with the new contract, which will drop the intake of dues, to only join again before the contract expires to reinstate their voting rights. This is another example of how RTW can be costly for unions.

With union membership already shrinking due to layoffs at many companies, unions in states with RTW will need to find ways to attract new hires coming into the company as well as retaining current members. This is something that will need to be worked out with each individual company as to how the union will be able to represent themselves during the new employee orientations.