According to The Wisconsin State Journal, Wisconsin law makers will likely vote Thursday on a proposed bill that would strip private unions in that state of their ability to charge mandatory fees of all workers that they represent. Such laws are commonly called “right-to-work” laws, which we posted an explainer about yesterday. Because unions are bound by the duty of fair representation, they must represent all workers within the bargaining unit. In order to cover those costs, workers in union shops must pay a fee which covers a “fair share” of the costs of representation they receive, including workers that have opted not to be union members. Passage of the bill would make Wisconsin the 25th state in the Union with such a law on its books. The Wisconsin State Journal reports that, “[o]pponents of the bill said it was an effort by the Republicans who control state government to weaken labor organizations that tend to support Democratic candidates.”
With right to work laws picking up steam in Illinois, Kentucky, and Missouri, and likely to be passed this week in Wisconsin, Lydia DePillis at The Washington Post takes a look at what options and strategies the labor movement might take up if the fight against right-to-work laws turn out to be a losing one. A survey of several labor experts revealed that, while these laws are a blow to labor, they do not spell its “obliteration.” But survival might require a revisioning of traditional labor mechanisms, such as permitting members-only unions, as Catherine Fisk and Benjamin Sachs made the case for in a recent paper. Other strategies that might strengthen worker bargaining power include advocating for laws that would require the disclosure of wage and salary information (as Cynthia Eslund has argued for), strengthening “alt-labor” organizations, and carving out a significant role in immigration legislation reform. Finally, unions simply need to work harder to demonstrate their value to the members and other workers. As David Rolf told The Washington Post “…now is the time for risk and experimentation and trying to build new models… [b]ecause whether we like it or not, some of the tools associated with those models are going away.”
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
July 4
The DOL scraps a Biden-era proposed rule to end subminimum wages for disabled workers; millions will lose access to Medicaid and SNAP due to new proof of work requirements; and states step up in the noncompete policy space.
July 3
California compromises with unions on housing; 11th Circuit rules against transgender teacher; Harvard removes hundreds from grad student union.
July 2
Block, Nanda, and Nayak argue that the NLRA is under attack, harming democracy; the EEOC files a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by former EEOC Commissioner Jocelyn Samuels; and SEIU Local 1000 strikes an agreement with the State of California to delay the state's return-to-office executive order for state workers.
July 1
In today’s news and commentary, the Department of Labor proposes to roll back minimum wage and overtime protections for home care workers, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by public defenders over a union’s Gaza statements, and Philadelphia’s largest municipal union is on strike for first time in nearly 40 years. On Monday, the U.S. […]
June 30
Antidiscrimination scholars question McDonnell Douglas, George Washington University Hospital bargained in bad faith, and NY regulators defend LPA dispensary law.
June 29
In today’s news and commentary, Trump v. CASA restricts nationwide injunctions, a preliminary injunction continues to stop DOL from shutting down Job Corps, and the minimum wage is set to rise in multiple cities and states. On Friday, the Supreme Court held in Trump v. CASA that universal injunctions “likely exceed the equitable authority that […]