Debunking the Myth that EFCA Won’t Harm Right to Work States
Friday, March 20th, 2009 by Ben BrubeckMany mistakenly believe the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) will have little to no effect on workers and businesses in Right to Work states. Politicians even may be tempted to use their states’ Right to Work status to justify their support of EFCA. One senator from a Right to Work state recently wrote this in response to an ABC member who contacted the legislator’s office in opposition to EFCA:
“This legislation [EFCA] would not overturn or weaken [X state’s] “Right to Work” law, as employees at [X state’s] businesses would still have the right not to join a union, even if their place of work were unionized. As the Senate considers this legislation, I will work to ensure any legislation that passes the Senate protects the rights of employers, workers who wish to form a union, and workers who do not wish to be represented by a union.”
So, what is a Right to Work law and how will EFCA impact workers and businesses in Right to Work states?
Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act authorizes individual states to adopt Right to Work laws, which secure the right of employees (with the exception of railway, airline and public employees in some circumstances) to decide for themselves whether to join or financially support a union. Workers cannot be compelled to join or pay the equivalent of dues to a union when a union is recognized in their workplace.
People hailing from one of the 22 states that have adopted Right to Work laws must remember that Right to Work laws do not prevent unions from obtaining monopoly bargaining power. Passage of EFCA would make union organizing much easier in these states and threatens employee freedom because workers will not be able to exercise individual bargaining with their employers once a union is recognized.
In short, Right to Work states will be equally harmed by EFCA as non-Right to Work states with one exception: Employees can opt out of paying union dues in Right to Work states if a union is certified under EFCA’s “card check” provision. However, employees and their employers still would be subject to government-imposed union contracts and increased employer fines – provisions in EFCA that are just as ill-spirited as stripping a worker’s right to a secret ballot election.
More importantly, Right to Work states are not insulated from the job killing arguments lodged against EFCA by Dr. Anne Layne Farrar in her recent study supported by the Alliance to Save Main Street Jobs (of which Associated Builders and Contractors is a member).
Considering the unemployment implications of EFCA and that the top eight states with the lowest unemployment rates are all Right to Work states, one wonders how senators can hide behind their states’ Right to Work status to justify supporting EFCA.
March 22nd, 2009 at 7:30 am
Paul says:Filthy propagandists. Stop telling lies to the people.