HR 360 Research Paper – Right to Work
April 18, 2015

RIGHT TO WORK
Introduction
When the labor union movement began in the early twentieth century, the goal was to safeguard the rights of labor and putting an end to management’s almost cruel and unrestricted power. Prior to the 1930s and 40s, when most of the pro-labor legislation was passed, management was free to treat workers as it saw fit, abusing the labor with only the economic bottom line in mind. Unions became a powerful and necessary weapon for labor in the battle for rights within the workplace. Over time, federal protection for union organizing and collective bargaining allowed unions to be more powerful and politically unfair. The rights of individuals seemed to be in jeopardy, as the collective fate of the union began to take on greater importance than those of the individual workers. Because of this, many states have established right-to-work laws, which make it illegal for unions and employers to only hire union members. These laws tend to be argued, the unions believe that they weaken labor’s power, while supporters of these laws believe that they safeguard the rights of individual workers.
History
The unions’ power began to set in the 1930s and 40s, with the passage of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA), which “provided employees the right to bargain collectively for wages, benefits and better working conditions” (Henderson, 2006), for the first time in U.S. history. There have been a few judicial cases that also helped to lessen the dislike toward unions, as they tried to form rights for the unions. In the 1939 Hague v. CIO case, the Supreme Court determined that local New Jersey ordinances which limited literature distribution and mass assembly were in violation of the First Amendment. In 1940, the high-profile case Carlson v. California, determined that labor picketing fell under the protection of the First Amendment (www.justia.com, 2015), establishing the foundation upon which labor unions would begin to claim great power and influence within the workplace and the political also. While unions were able to grow in size and power as a result of government intervention, the rights of individual workers were getting lost. In some cases they were downright ignored, as the NLRA of 1935 which helped strengthen the unions’ position in the workplace also allowed organized labor to ask for the dismissal of any workers who were not union members (closed shops). A closed shop is “a shop in which persons are required to join a particular union as a precondition to employment and to remain union members for the duration of their employment (The Free Dictionary.com , 2015). So while workers avoided the bullying of management, they were also under the thumb of the union. It didn’t take long for individual workers to start complaining against businesses that operated as ‘closed shops.’ The problem was first faced on the state level in the 1940s, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s used wartime measures to force management into agreeing to the forced unionization of all employees. Many businesses adopted the practice, and ‘closed shops’ essentially became the norm throughout the U.S. Some states began to react to the protest against forced unionization and passed legislation to address the issue. During the 1940s, twelve states passed so-called ‘right-to-work’ laws, which prevented businesses from demanding that workers join unions and pay union dues in order to be hired. Under the NLRA of 1935, the federal government still permitted the practice of forced unionization (Zieger R. H., 2002).
Taft-Hartley Act 1947
In 1947, when Congress overruled President Harry Truman’s veto of a series of revisions to the NLRA of 1935 known as the Taft-Hartley Act, it was a victory for right-to-work proponents. The Taft-Hartley Act added a clause which acknowledged that it was within states’ rights to pass right-to-work laws (Zieger R. H., 2002) . This clause, Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act, was encouraging for right-to-work supporters, but organized labor saw it as a hit to their power and would set off a lot of debates that would last decades. During the two decades following Taft-Hartley’s enactment, legislation that would do away with the right-to-work section was introduced many times, but the unions couldn’t get support to see that these measures actually made it to Congress. In 1964, organized labor had big election wins candidates who supported the unions winning seats in Congress, and the chance to finally erase Taft-Hartley as well as get rid state-mandated right-to-work laws (Zieger R. H., American Workers, American Unions: The Twentieth Century, 2002). In July of 1965, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the 14(b) Repeal Bill by a narrow margin of 221-203, and it revived the right-to-work supporters. The National Right to Work Committee, a nonprofit organization founded in 1955 to protect Americans’ right to choose to join, or not join, a union in order to secure employment, began to work to prevent the passage of the 14(b) Repeal Bill (Zieger R. H., American Workers, American Unions: The Twentieth Century, 2002).
The Repeal Bill required a two-thirds majority to pass in the Senate, as Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-Ill.) began a filibuster to prevent its passage. As a result, the bill did not pass, as senators who supported organized labor were unable to put an end to the filibuster carried on by Dirksen and other senators who in favor of right-to-work laws in the fall of 1965 and winter of 1966. The final blow to the 14(b) Repeal Bill was dealt on February 10, 1966 by Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (D-Mont.).
Common Situs Picketing Bill
Between the years of 1975 and 1977, organized labor strongly supported the common situs picketing Bill, which would have allowed building-trades unions to close construction projects that utilized dozens of independent contractors unless all employers consented to employ only union workers. If the bill passed, thousands of independent workers would be forced into unions, regardless of whether they wanted to join or not. In July 1975, the common situs picketing bill passed through the House of Representatives by a wide margin of 230-178. Organized labor scored another victory in November of the same year, pro-union senators were able to put an end to a right-to-work filibuster, and push the bill through to the White House. President Gerald Ford had previously committed to signing the common situs picketing bill, but in the face of extreme pressure from the Nation Right to Work Committee and other lobbyist groups, President Ford reversed his position. On January 2, 1976, he vetoed the bill, putting an end to it permanently. The link is the actual document of his notes on the picketing bill (Ford Library Museum.gov, 2015). The right-to-work movement was ready for success and the 1976 elections saw it gain many seats in Congress. Union lobbyists weren’t giving up, they realized legislation that directly attacked right-to-work laws would not pass, as organized labor didn’t have enough support in Congress. The American public had been opposed to the common situs picketing bill, which was another blow to the unions. Organized labor remained determined to get rid of right-to-work laws, and with the assistance of President Jimmy Carter’s Secretary of Labor, Ray Marshall, the so-called labor law ‘reform’ bill was revealed in 1977.
Labor Reform Bill
Secretary Marshall claimed that the bill wouldn’t make union membership necessary, but did call for more stringent penalties on employers who refused to comply with the forced unionization of their employees. This approach aided organized labor to see the bill enacted, as it passed through the House of Representatives in October 1977 by an overwhelming margin of 257-163. The true purpose of the labor law ‘reform’ bill was to increase the amount of required union dues that were collected, as the same representative who supported the bill prevented the passage of any amendments, supported by the right-to-work movement, which would have stopped union officials from using their new power to enter into new forced-due contracts (Zieger R. H., American Workers, American Union: The Twentieth Century, 2002). In the end, the labor law ‘reform’ bill never made it to President Carter’s desk, as pro-union senators were unable to put an end to yet another right-to-work filibuster, and the bill was struck dead.
The next big issue to right-to-work laws didn’t happen until 1991, when union lobbyists once again tried to expand labor’s power. Between 1991 and 1994, Congress voted on the Kennedy-Metzenbaum ‘Striker Replacement’ Bill on numerous occasions. The bill called for employers to punish or fire employees who didn’t follow strike orders from union officials.
It passed through the House of Representative in July 1991 by a margin of 247-182. The legislation was stopped once again in the Senate in June of 1982, however, by a right-to-work filibuster. When President Bill Clinton took office in 1993, he vowed to pass the ‘Striker Replacement’ Bill if it reached his desk. The bill passed through the House, this time by a margin of 239-190, but was shot down in the Senate, where a July 1994 right-to-work filibuster crushed it.
Today, the following twenty five states have passed right-to-work laws: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. The right-to-work legislation in these states guarantees that no person can be forced to join or pay dues to a union as a condition of employment, and ended the concept of a ‘closed’ or union shop. Right-to-work supporters believe that these laws simply uphold the right of the individual, as opposed to forcing him to submit to the will of the union. The National Right to Work Committee (NRTWC) also says that statistics prove that right-to-work states enjoy greater economic success than states that call for forced union dues and fees, and a faster growth in manufacturing and nonagricultural jobs and capital expenditures, lower unemployment rates, and fewer work stoppages. Furthermore, NRTWC also maintains that per capita income has grown significantly in these states over the past couple of decades (NRTW.org, 2015).
Organized labor believes that right-to-work laws are actually detrimental to workers. Union leadership states that legislation allows nonmembers to receive all the same benefits that members receive without having to pay for them. They refer to these non-members as ‘free riders’ because they believe they are receiving a free ride at the expense of the union. The unions say that while they don’t believe that anyone should be forced to join a union, all workers must pay a fair share of the costs of union representation since by law, unions are required to represent all workers regardless of whether they are members or not. Also, union officials claim that workers in right-to-work states earn less than those that are not right-to-work states, as these laws actually weaken the unions and decrease wages.
Conclusion
It is in my opinion that right-to-work laws have become such a controversial issue, and it’s not hard to understand why groups like the NRTWC support such legislation since they protect the rights of individuals to make their own decisions when it comes to union membership. Because labor unions have fought long and hard to get the power necessary to safeguard workers’ rights, organized labor is worried of measures that might show a rollback of progress the movement has made. Until national right-to-work legislation is passed, the issue will remain in the hands of the state governments, keeping the long debate alive.

References
(2015, April 6). Retrieved from www.justia.com: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/310/106/case.html
(2015, April 6). Retrieved from The Free Dictionary.com : http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Closed+Shop
(2015, April 8). Retrieved from Ford Library Museum.gov: http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/document/0055/12006964.pdf
(2015, April 13). Retrieved from NRTW.org: http://www.nrtw.org/b/rtw_faq.htm
Henderson, R. L. (2006). Compensation Management in a Knowledge-Based World (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.
Zieger, R. H. (2002). American Workers, American Union: The Twentieth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Zieger, R. H. (2002). American Workers, American Unions: The Twentieth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Zieger, R. H. (2002). American Workers, American Unions: The Twentieth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Zieger, R. H. (2002). American Workers, American Unions: The Twentieth Century. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Zieger, R. H. (2002). American Workers, American Unions: The Twentieth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.