"Right to Work"

I am pro-union.

Now that we have that out in the open, let's get to the substance of this post: Why right-to-work (RTW) laws are disingenuous, fundamentally unfair, and probably unconstitutional.

1. They're Disingenuous

I have never met someone who (a) wants to work for a particular company, (b) wants desperately not to be a member of the union in place; and (c) can't find comparable non-union employment. This is the individual who this law is designed to "protect," and such individual resides, I think, right between Moby Dick and Santa Claus. In other words, whoever this law is supposed to help (according to its proponents) does not exist.

The real beneficiaries of this law are the business owners who want to suppress wages, plain and simple. Note to such business owners, if you need the government's aid to suppress wages in order to stay in business, you have a business model problem and you are depending on the government for your livelihood every bit as much as a welfare recipient.

These laws are disingenuous in their purported efforts to "protect workers."

2. They're Fundamentally Unfair

I know that "fairness" is a dirty word these days; make of that what you will in regard to the society that we've created. However, a right-to-work law states that one can't be forced to pay the union for its services. It does not say that the union doesn't have to represent these freeloaders. In fact, the union is forced to represent these freeloaders, come hell or high water.

To the point of disingenuous, stated above, nowhere do the supporters of these laws acknowledge that the union must represent all the workers, whether they pay dues or not. RTW supporters like to say that unions will "earn their membership through the free market," but this too is disingenuous: who pays for things they get for free? Why would I pay for representation when I get it for free anymore than I would pay for sunshine?

3. They're Probably Unconstitutional

Not that I expect our stolen Supreme Court (looking at you Gorsuch) to do anything about this, but follow me here:

• Corporations are people (distasteful as that may be);
• Unions are corporations;
• Therefore unions are people;
• RTW laws preclude unions from collecting mandatory dues from members of the bargaining unit (employees at the same place);
• The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) forces unions (people, remember) to representing all members of the bargaining unit (employees at the same place);
• Therefore, RTW, in combination with the NLRA, forces unions to work on behalf of people without compensation.

Someone explain to me how this does not enslave the unions.

End Note

As I said at the outset, I support unions and will debate their merits with any and all comers. However, this post is NOT about the merits of unionism but rather about right-to-work laws.