Right to Workin in the Development of Businesses and the Economy - Assignment Example

Right to Work Introduction The need to uphold the rights of workers has been evident because of the huge role that labour plays in the development of businesses and the economy. This was the subject of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 that sought to reflect on the legislations regarding workers’ relations as outlined in the National Labour Relations Act of 1935. It sought to include a provision that was later called the ‘right to work’ laws. In perspective, these are legal provisions that prohibit the demand that all workers to be members of labour unions and pay the necessary dues as a critical condition of their employment (Chavez & Rustin, 2010, p. 143). Upon its passage, twelve states adopted the right-to-work laws, and since then eleven states have proceeded to approve the laws in their legal systems. The latest state to adopt the legal provisions is Indiana, which had earlier reviewed its right-to-work laws in 1965. However, a fresh bill on the right-to-work legal requirement was made in 2012. This protracted struggle has exposed the opposing views on the subject of labour laws, with many analysts giving differing opinions on the subject. History of the right-to-work The history of the legislation and the gist behind its provisions can be dated back to the 19th century in France. In the years preceding the French revolution, Louis Blanc came up with the term right-to-work, at a time when the nation was facing staid problems in terms of unemployment and lack of freedom or good labour laws. These issues alongside other social difficulties were the subject of the French revolution, and the term was used in subsequent situations where workers demanded certain rights to be considered. The term gained prominence in the 20th century, when it was introduced as a legal proposition, discussed and passed in the United States (Chavez & Rustin, 2010, p. 92). This legal provision was timely in order to offer freedom and equality for all citizens to pursue and acquire employment opportunities equally, at a time when the existing professionals were placing constraints for aspiring candidates. Progressively, the labour laws under the right-to-work have been adopted by other states, which have drawn better terms of work by professionals and entrepreneurs. Debate Those who advocate for the for the right-to-work mainly point of its provision that seeks to elaborate that the ban on union shops reduces the ability of the labour unions to control their workers and maintain their allegiance to the union. They argue that with this ban in place, it is evident that labour unions have reduced powers to bargain with the employers, by raising their cost structures in a way that allows unscrupulous members to free riding (Chavez & Rustin, 2010, p. 102). This legal statute seeks to ensure that non-allegiance to the union through unpaid dues and the reluctance to join trade unions is controlled and that no workers free ride on the work of the union. In this perspective, the statutes in the bill are most useful in some areas that do not have a good history of labour unions where there is no custom of belonging to unions and therefore urgent regulation made to eliminate any attempts to subject workers with the responsibility of belonging to the union. On the other hand, the issue of collective bargaining is pointed out by most proponents of the right-to-work. These were the postulations of a minority of the workers demanding better working conditions against a host of majority who were opposed to the bill. In this respect, it is apparent that the bill confers rights of the minority to have bargaining powers in ways that grant them freedom not to join unions and still make their concerns known. It is palpable that the need of such legal postulations subject the minority interests of the majority will, which is against the fundamental rights of the workers in any given state. Other proponents of the idea relate the legal provisions of right-to-work with the freedom of the workers to associate and become members of groups as they wish. They argue that non right-to-work intentions are aimed violating the freedom of the workers to engage in unions or groups, which should be left to their own discretion. They prefer to safeguard their discretion to be members of any private organization that they trust and hope will fight for their rights (Chavez & Rustin, 2010, p. 104). They oppose the previous notion of being aggregated into majority groups that express collective interests that may not serve the rights of all the members. To this end, the right-to-work largely gives freedom of association for the workers without any undue agenda in political or economic aspects that are aimed at oppressing the workers. Proponents of the right-to-work has also attempted to explain the bargaining position of the union, as well as the free rider problem, in order to determine the extent to which the framework can be used to represent the opinions of the workers. Using the forces of labour demand and supply, it was evident that the laws are a true reflection of the existing preferences of the workers as put forward by their trade unions. However, in states where there was a lack of this information, it was evident that there was a lower demand for employment opportunities that were served by the unions. In the states in the south, for example, it was apparent that majority of the workers were utterly reluctant to join trade unions. In this situation, the studies sought to expose the huge role played by social customs in the determination of whether to join labour unions or not, as well as the free rider phenomenon. On the other hand, the right-to-work states have experienced more benefits as opposed to those that have not adopted the provisions. It is palpable, from recent study that the states that have adopted these provisions have higher economic growth rates and high rates of new employment. It is evident that granting freedom to the workers increases desirability of the job market, making more workers willing to participate in the labour force. In this perspective, therefore, the workers are motivated to make their choices and determine the kind of work conditions that suit their quality of service (Chavez & Rustin, 2010, p. 110). It is evident, therefore, that when workers are motivated in offering their services, there is an increase in labour productivity, which leads to higher economic growth rates. Proponents of the idea therefore argue that there is a connection between high rates of development and the enactment of these laws in the states that have adopted it in their legal systems. The analysis of most research has also focused on the effect of the laws on the wages of workers in states that have adopted the provision. It is noteworthy that the research has proven a positive correlation, which is an apparent contradiction of the economic analysis of trade unions. For the labour market analysis, it is evident that the presence of unions is a major driver towards achieving higher wages for workers. On the other hand, the rise in wages of the union workers has a reverse effect on the non-union workers and may decrease their wages. To explain this paradox, researchers have assessed the effect of other pertinent factors in the labour market that may lead to higher wages, such as increased productivity levels due to motivation and freedom for the laws. Opponents The opponents of the legal provision argue that it is imperative for all workers to be covered in the umbrella of trade unions to dilute the power of big businesses in the economy. It is evident that by joining the unions, the workers are able to consolidate their power and raise their average earnings by considerable margins. Further, they argue that such laws encourage free riding, in ways where workers enjoy the gains made by trade unions, but do not pay for the service offered. This paralyses the bargaining power of the workers, which is in the heat of the labour market negotiations. On the other hand, opponents dismiss the law as a clear promoter of free riding in the economy. In perspective, they argue that such laws limit the ability of the employees to consolidate their efforts and enter into negotiations with the employers to make constructive conclusions. This particular disconnect, which prohibits the workers from giving their fair share of fees is a pre-cursor to the free riding problem in the economy (Chavez & Rustin, 2010, p. 151). This means that with the dominance of non-union workers in the economy, the actions of the labour unions are subject to the interests of the non-union workers. In this respect, they argue that the legal postulation undermines the roles of trade unions and burden their decision-making processes. The opponents further argue that the laws will lead to an ultimate fall in the conditions of the workers, their rights as well as their wages. It is evident that the weakening of trade unions will create an arena that seeks to an incident called the race to the bottom (Chavez & Rustin, 2010, p. 152). This is a situation marred with non-compliance to labour laws, the rights of workers and persistently lower wages. The race to the bottom leads to depreciation in the quality of labour standards that are adhered to by organizations in the labour economy. Progressively, the opponents argue that in the end, the trend leads to an untamed labour market, reduced productivity levels and trends towards the least wages possible. This leads to capital flight and concerted efforts to salvage the situation at this point may not bear any fruits. Finally, opponents of the right to work argue that such policies lead to economic slowdowns and may lead to tendencies that only harm the economy. They argue that with the falling wages due to lack of union bargaining, the workers will not be motivated to join the workforce. Those who choose to work at the lower levels are de-motivated and cannot contribute to the economic growth of the country. In this sense, granting workers the freedom to choose whether they would join unions or not foresees a bad future for economies as there will be no incentives for job creation or investments. They point to the fact that he number of new companies that have come up in states with the legislation has fallen by close to a third, and the prospects could be worse in the future. Conclusion From the argument, it is evident that the right-to-work laws are an integral part of the labour law and is good for the economy. It is evident that giving people the freedom to decide the right of association is a trend towards respecting their rights. On this grounding, the right to work laws will lead to high levels of inspiration and freedom, which will have positive impacts on the economy in the future. References Chavez, C. E., & Rustin, B. (2010). "Right to work" laws, a trap for America's minorities. New York: A. Philip Randolph Institute. Read More