1 Answer | Add Yours
I have problems with both kinds of laws. Neither of them seems right to me. A closed shop seems wrong in many ways. It does not seem that a person should be required to join a union simply because they want to work in a certain place. Forcing someone to do this does not seem to be in line with American freedoms.
On the other hand, right to work laws seem unfair. If a union exists in a workplace, it should not be possible for non-members to gain the benefits of unionization. If the union has negotiated certain wages and rules, those things should not apply to anyone who does not join the union and pay their dues. When we create right to work laws, we are essentially allowing people to “free-ride” on the actions of the union. This, too, seems un-American.
I suppose that I would support a rule saying that there had to be different wages and work rules for union and non-union employees. It would be illegal to give non-union employees the same benefits that the union has bargained for. However, this would be very difficult to enforce and it is probably not realistic.
We’ve answered 319,863 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question