Right to Work as a Constitutional Right
The right to work in the United States, is it a constitutional right?
Prepare an outline of the topic based upon legal research
This needs to be a 3 page abstract writing assignment that consists of a cover page, an abstract (this is essentially an executive summary of the hypothetical 5-8 page paper and a bibliography that contains at least 5 academic sources.
Right to Work as a Constitutional Right
According to the first Amendment, every American worker has the right to seek employment without having membership in any union or paying due fees to union groups (LaJeunesse, 2019). There has been confusion with the term right-to-work where people tend to think it is the right to acquire and maintain a job whereas the meaning of the phrase refers to matters pertaining unionization. The right-to-work law is also referred to as workplace choice or workplace freedom as it gives employees authority to decide on union matters. At the workplace, those without a union can still get treatment similar to those with a union as expected by the enactment of this law. Unionized workplaces are obliged to make it optional for non-unionized employees to choose representation from the union when needed. These employees are also free from paying fees to their unionized employer.
Due to the Taft-Harley Act amended by President Truman in 1947, the right-to-work has become a relevant law today. State governments are prohibited by this law from making it mandatory for employees to be unionized. However, the law is not accepted in all states as only 28 states have enforced it to date. Those states that have not passed the law still require their citizens to adhere to traditional practices such as paying o union dues and fees (Erickson and Walter, 2017). States that have accepted the right-to-work laws still recognize unions and treat them as relevant organizations. Unions in right-to-work states play an important role or employees who take up their services as their dealings are recognized by the law as well (Baranowski, 2017). For these states that accept the law, mandatory unionization is ruled as illegal while employers who feel the urge to unionize their environment are allowed to do so as long as they offer their services to employees free of charge or optional.
As constitutional as the right-to-work may appear, there are sayings that the law has enabled employers to pay their workers less. Criticism of the law has led to it being named as right-to-work-for-less due to the low wages that come with the right. Furthermore, the states that have enforced the law are said to fall within lower cost of living hence the workers being paid less. When compared to states without the law, it is easy to point out the disparities between allowances. Employers in right-to-work states are said to pay their workers nominal wages since they have no representation. In reality it is much easier to take advantage o workers who have no representation. Since it’s optional for organizations to unionize their workplace, it becomes difficult for management to consider extra funds for maintaining unions. Hence, most of the workplaces lack representation for workers.
The right-to-work law was set as a means to set economic dignity for workers which is a political-legal expression of maintaining the right to human dignity (Regilme and Polat, 2019). This economic dignity that is supposed to come with the right-to-work involves enabling workers to be able to afford their needs without being manipulated to join unions at work. But, as much as the Supreme Court had good intentions in enforcing the law, some employees are not able to attain the required dignity. These states with lower costs of living tend to have employers who are paying workers below the set American trends since they are not unionized. Hence, it becomes harder for the workers to compete with fellow Americans on issues such as housing, social security, healthcare, food and water (Regilme and Polat, 2019). Such conditions have pioneered debates about the constitutionality of this law since it is demeaning to employees under certain circumstances.
Janus v. AFSCME (2018) is an example of a case that has challenged the right-to-work law within the public sector. The debate of worker equity and health is an area of focus when it comes to this case. What Janus was trying to fight for was his First Amendment right of being able to receive representation within his unionized workplace without paying due fees to the union (Eisenberg-Guyot and Hagopian, 2018). If the court rules in his favor, they would have allowed oy riding of workers. This brings the issue of union consideration when the right-to-work law is implemented. Many a times, people seem to forget that unions also need the fees to continue with the representation they give to employees. A field that has been well represented to fight for worker’s health and equity.
Overall, determining the right in the constitutionality of right-to-work is puzzling for the society. Even if the law is present within the constitution, its execution may either be used as a positive or negative aspect for employees. States that chose to enforce it have employees who are free from unionization while at the same time their employers are given the power to victimize them. The lack of representation may be a good or bad thing for workers on all angles. For years, labor unions have done a good job representing workers that is why some states are not willing to sign in the law. And even as some claim the law perpetuates lower wages or workers, there are those who do not believe in paid representation for what should be a right for workers.
References
Baranowski, B. (2017). The Workplace Constitution from the New Deal to the New Right. By Sophia Z. Lee. Cambridge University Press. 2015. History, 102(350), 350-352.
Eisenberg-Guyot, J., & Hagopian, A. (2018). Right-to-Work-for-Less: How Janus v. AFSCME Threatens Public Health. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1048291118784713
Erickson, R., & Walter, K. (2017). Right to Work Would Harm All Americans. Center for American Progress Action Fund. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/reports/2017/05/18/167539/right-work-harm-americans/
LaJeunesse, R. (2019). The Future looks Bright for the Right-to-work Movement. Regulatory Review. Retrieved from https://www.theregreview.org/2019/04/05/lajeunesse-right-to-work-movement/
Regilme, S. S., & Polat, E. N. (2019). Right to Economic Dignity. The Palgrave Encyclopedi of Global Security Studies. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74336-3_326-1
