RIGHT TO WORK
Happy Labor Day!
Which is a great reason to address my next topic that I'm still really learning and digging into, as I think it will be up for legislation in the next 2 years: UNIONS V. RIGHT TO WORK (RTW)!
As a Liberty Republican, it's not surprising that I naturally fall into the RTW camp and celebrated the Janus decision this year w my politically like friends. But it seemed so obvious to support people getting to keep more of their own money, that I've had to dig in and listen really hard to the other side, from many pro-union friends who I respect and admire, to figure out the reasons against it and how we can compromise details without compromising either of our values, and I've thought of some things that break from the either/or divisional legislation options from the traditional right and left:
1) Remove the freeloader benefit. Under current RTW work laws, you can opt out of the union, but you still get all the benefits that the union negotiates year to year. It seems understandable to me that dues-paying members are incensed about this. Collective bargaining has been the cornerstone of unions since the 1800s, and it has helped us shape the modern workforce (like by giving us Labor Day) but it's also hurt individuals when they don't agree w the decisions at the top (like friends I knew in the fall of Northwest Airlines). In the model I imagine, people who opt out of the union would also take on the personal responsibility to negotiate their own pay, benefits, leave, etc. If they are envious of their union coworkers, they can opt in to the union at any time, and vice versa. If the unions are doing way better, it will be easy to see their value add, and if the individuals are doing better, it will force the union to reevaluate their tactics or dissolve. Apples to apples comparisons that I think would vary widely field to field.
2) Remove US healthcare from being traditionally employer-tied. Part of why unions feel needed in many fields is because work contracts have become to complicated that they seem hard to navigate alone. Factor in pay per hour, minus union dues and health insurance, but plus vacation days and pension, etc. and the dollars of your salary are not your real income. In a previous post, I talked about making healthcare a separate purchase item (like car insurance) instead of tying it to employment. This would make one aspect of job negotiations easier, thereby reducing the need and the cost of union contract negotiations.
3) Give unions a different purpose. The biggest dissent against unions from my side of the aisle is that they're too politically motivated, they spend our dollars on candidates/causes that we don't agree with, in the name of worker support. Unions are mitigating this w Beck Rights and separate funds for political purposes, but that doesn't change the fact that they still represent ALL of their field in their endorsements. I think unions need to get out of the political field and put that money back into human rights and community. Spend it on charities that fight human trafficking, sponsor nonprofit job programs or homeless shelters, invest more in trade training and integrate w schools to give them the supplies they need to prepare an energize students about your job. And yes, some of that IS happening, but we don't see it nearly as much as we see the political fighting. Make those contributions THE thing you spend your $1.7B per year on and I promise public opinion will swing back in your favor before you know it, and I'd be HONORED to join a union that helped our community more than it helped their super PACs.
Like I said, I'm still learning a lot of this, so PLEASE feel free to enlighten me on why or how these can or can't work. Contrary to popular belief about Republicans, I don't believe unions are evil, I thank them immensely for everything they fought for 100 years ago that we still enjoy today, and I hope they can evolve into something that is helpful to everyone, not just to half the country. The Minnesota RFL Caucus appreciates you, and I do, too!