right to work negates the union's ability to collectively bargain, as people will simply opt out in hopes of continuing to receive the union's benefits.
why does the government have to step in and negate a contract between an employer and a collective of laborers? i thought republicans were all for that sort of thing. you know, laissez-faire, keep big gubmint out of my life
"right to work" is orwellian doublespeak. everyone should have the right to work at, at the least, a living wage. however, the republican version of "right to work" is simply "purposefully removing the ability to organize, and most certainly not guaranteeing any sort of actual right to work"
That's garbage, and I think you know it.
Unions can organize just fine in a right to work state and generally have no trouble doing so.
If the union is well led and provides value to the membership, then right to work laws do not harm them in any way. Righ to work laws just sop the union for extorting the members for dues.
It's checks and balances, the company has the union to provide a check against ripping off the workers, the unions need a check against themselves and right to work is of way of doing that.
