Right-to-Work to Fuel Debate in States and Localities 2015 Right-to-work laws, which exist in 24 states, allow employees to decide whether to join or financially support a labor union. Proponents of right-to-work laws argue that right-to-work states attract more jobs than states that are not right-to-work. Opponents argue that allowing workers to opt-out of paying union dues while still benefiting from union collective bargaining and representation is unfair. Lawmakers in Wisconsin, New Mexico, Ohio, New Hampshire, Missouri, Colorado, Kentucky, Montana and Pennsylvania plan to introduce and push right-to-work legislation in 2015. Michigan and Indiana are the most recent states to enact right-to-work, with both states adopting the policy in 2012. In 2014, the Missouri Senate passed a right-to-work bill, but supporters were unable to find enough votes to pass the Missouri House. The map below shows the states that currently have right-to-work via statute or constitutional amendment.
Despite widespread support among Republicans for the policy, not all think that this is the year to pursue right-to-work. In Wisconsin, Governor Walker (R), whose controversial law limiting collective bargaining rights for most public employees in 2011 inspired a recall effort by organized labor, says that right-to-work legislation would be a distraction for state lawmakers right now. Other Wisconsin lawmakers have voiced equally skeptical opinions about making right-to-work a legislative priority. But other lawmakers in Wisconsin join colleagues in a number of newly Republican state legislatures that sound enthusiastic about the prospects of passing right-to-work laws. Local Governments Join the Right-to-Work Movement While state lawmakers prepare for the 2015 legislative sessions, a new battle over right-to-work is forming on the local level. In December 2014, the Kentucky counties of Warren, Fulton, and Simpson approved right-to-work ordinances to cover the workers within their boundaries. These three are the first counties in the nation to pass such ordinances. Already, three additional Kentucky counties – Hardin, Todd and Cumberland – are considering right-to-work ordinances of their own. Labor organizations will sue these counties over the right-to-work ordinances, and it’s unclear whether such ordinances will be found legal. Shortly after Warren County passed its right-to-work ordinance, the Kentucky Attorney General’s Office issued an opinion that found counties do not have the authority to pass right-to-work legislation because the ordinances are preempted by the National Labor Relations Act. The Attorney General’s opinion cites previous cases that found city right-to-work ordinances preempted by federal law. The opinion concludes that “The courts are uniform that the exemption carved out in 29 U.S.C. § 164(b) only refers to states themselves, and not political subdivisions of states.” A new 501(c)(4) organization called Protect My Check Inc. has vowed to cover the legal costs for counties that pass right-to-work ordinances. Protect My Check along with conservative organizations including the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the Heritage Foundation are advocating for counties to pass right-to-work ordinances. These groups argue that counties are not preempted under the National Labor Relations Act. Additionally, they argue that under Kentucky’s Home Rule law, county ordinances should be viewed as “state law.” States are expressly allowed to pass right-to-work legislature under the National Labor Relations Act. With Republicans in control of an unprecedented number of states, expect state legislatures to debate right-to-work bills early this new legislative session. And considering the new wrinkle the counties in Kentucky have introduced to the debate, there will be an added legal fight that could spill over and amplify the debate into other levels of lawmaking. |
Copyright © 2014 National Association of Manufacturers |