OnLabor

Law. Workers. Organizing.

Follow OnLabor on X
Subscribe via RSS

Category:Right to Work

The Legal Problem with Wisconsin's Right-to-Work Law (and what to do about it)

Mar 4, 2015 Benjamin Sachs

Wisconsin is about to pass a right-to-work law. Yesterday, Rachel provided an excellent background on this bill. Here, I want to make just a couple of comments. First, the relevant language of the Wisconsin bill is identical to Indiana’s recently-enacted statute. The law would dictate that no one may be required, as a condition of […]

Right-to-Work: Seventh Circuit Splits 5-5 on Rehearing Sweeney v. Pence

Jan 14, 2015 Benjamin Sachs

The seventh circuit yesterday denied appellants’ petition for rehearing en banc in Sweeney v. Pence, a case involving the legality of Indiana’s right-to-work law. But the vote on the petition was 5-5: Judges Posner, Rovner, Wood, Williams, and Hamilton dissented from the denial “for the reasons stated in Chief Judge Wood’s dissent to the panel opinion.” Despite the outcome here, the […]

Indiana Supreme Court Upholds Right to Work Law

Dec 9, 2014 Antonia Domingo

Opponents of right to work laws recently suffered setbacks in Indiana. The International Union of Operating Engineers Local 150 brought a lawsuit in February of this year, claiming that Indiana’s right-to-work law violated the state constitution. Lake County judge George Paras agreed, holding on July 17 that the legislation violated Indiana’s constitutional provision that prohibits […]

Right-to-Work and Preemption: Amicus in Sweeney v. Pence

Oct 13, 2014 Benjamin Sachs

Catherine Fisk and I have filed an amicus in Sweeney v. Pence urging the seventh circuit to grant the petition for rehearing en banc. We argue (based on our forthcoming article) that Indiana’s right-to-work law is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act. Here’s the summary: In February 2012, Indiana enacted so-called right-to-work legislation invalidating any […]

Guest Post: Another Response on Sweeney and Members-Only Unions

Sep 12, 2014 Catherine Fisk

Catherine Fisk is the Chancellor’s Professor of Law at University of California, Irvine. This post is part of a series: Heather Whitney’s initial post, Mr. Sherk’s reply, Ms. Whitney’s response, Professor Catherine Fisk’s reply, and Mr. Sherk’s response. James’s response overlooks a federal law that prohibits unions and employers from resolving the right-to-work free-rider problem by […]

Guest Post: A Reply on Sweeney and the Takings Clause

Sep 12, 2014 James Sherk

James Sherk is a Senior Policy Analyst in Labor Economics at the Heritage Foundation. This post is part of a series: Heather Whitney’s initial post, Mr. Sherk’s reply, Ms. Whitney’s response, and Professor Catherine Fisk’s reply. Thanks to Heather and Catherine for their thoughtful replies about the Takings clause and Right-to-Work. To respond to Heather’s […]

Guest Post: A Reply on Exclusive Representation and Sweeney v. Pence

Sep 8, 2014 Catherine Fisk

Catherine Fisk is the Chancellor’s Professor of Law at University of California, Irvine. This post is part of a series: Heather Whitney’s initial post, James Sherk’s reply, and Ms. Whitney’s response. In the debate between Heather and James over whether right-to-work laws require unions and their members to pay for services for nonpayers, Heather is […]

Guest Post: A Response to James Sherk on the Takings Clause and Exclusive Representation

Sep 8, 2014 Heather Whitney

Heather Whitney is a Lecturer in Law and Bigelow Teaching Fellow at the University of Chicago. This is a response to James Sherk’s post; Ms. Whitney’s original post is available here. James’s response to my post misapprehends the current state of the law in at least two ways. First, federal labor law provides unions the […]

Guest Post: On the Takings Clause and Exclusive Representation — A Reply to Heather Whitney

Sep 8, 2014 James Sherk

James Sherk is a Senior Policy Analyst in Labor Economics at the Heritage Foundation. This is a reply to Heather Whitney’s recent post. Heather Whitney’s recent post on the Takings Clause and Right-to-Work misses a crucial point: Federal law does not require unions to act as an exclusive representative. Thus Right-to-Work laws do not force […]

Guest Post: The Takings Clause and Sweeney v. Pence

Sep 4, 2014 Heather Whitney

Heather Whitney is a Lecturer in Law and Bigelow Teaching Fellow at the University of Chicago. She clerked for Chief Judge Wood before starting at Chicago. The views expressed here are her own and do not necessarily represent those of Judge Wood. In an op-ed back in July, Ben and Catherine Fisk argued that the […]

Newer
1
2
3
4
Older

OnLabor

Law. Workers. Organizing.

OnLabor is a blog devoted to workers, unions, and their politics. We interpret our subject broadly to include the current crisis in the traditional union movement (why union decline is happening and what it means for our society); the new and contested forms of worker organization that are filling the labor union gap; how work ought to be structured and managed; how workers ought to be represented and compensated; and the appropriate role of government — all three branches — in each of these issues.

Learn more about OnLabor

OnLabor is unable to accept unsolicited submissions.

Follow OnLabor on X
Subscribe via RSS

Contact: [email protected]
Site design: Jon White Studio

Sections

All Editorial Writing
All News & Commentary
From The Editor
From Senior Contributors
Analysis From Guest Voices
OnLabor In The News
All Featured Coverage
About

Connect

Follow OnLabor on X
Subscribe via RSS

Search for:

The Legal Problem with Wisconsin's Right-to-Work Law (and what to do about it)

Right-to-Work: Seventh Circuit Splits 5-5 on Rehearing Sweeney v. Pence

Indiana Supreme Court Upholds Right to Work Law

Right-to-Work and Preemption: Amicus in Sweeney v. Pence

Guest Post: Another Response on Sweeney and Members-Only Unions

Guest Post: A Reply on Sweeney and the Takings Clause

Guest Post: A Reply on Exclusive Representation and Sweeney v. Pence

Guest Post: A Response to James Sherk on the Takings Clause and Exclusive Representation

Guest Post: On the Takings Clause and Exclusive Representation — A Reply to Heather Whitney

Guest Post: The Takings Clause and Sweeney v. Pence