Can anyone help explain right-to-work laws to me, please?

[ArenaBoy]

THere's been talk of people trying to get those laws going in Michigan, and I've had little to no luck trying to find arguments against but unsurprisingly I've found several arguments for it.

Thanks in advance, Michigan's a huge union state, and I'd like to know more.

[ExRetailDrone]

From what I can tell, it basically means that no employer who works with a labor union can force a potential or new employee to join that union as a condition of employment. My husband, for example: when he took a job teaching at a university, he wasn't told until he signed the paperwork that he would have to join the union for that university or else, basically, he couldn't work there. He was forced to pay dues for a union that really didn't do anything to affect him positively, and his only recourse was staying unemployed at that point. A right-to-work law would not allow such a thing to happen.

I hope I'm understanding that correctly, anyway.

Here's a link I found on the subject that might help.

[AdminAssistant]

Right-to-work also means that your employer can fire you for just about any reason.

[Andara Bledin]

At Will means that the employer can fire for any reason.

Right To Work is specifically only about the employee not being required to join or stay in a union as a condition of employment.

^-.-^

[AdminAssistant]

Ah, okay. Every state I've lived in has had both, so I guess I just confused them.

[Shangri-laschild]

From what I can tell, it basically means that no employer who works with a labor union can force a potential or new employee to join that union as a condition of employment. My husband, for example: when he took a job teaching at a university, he wasn't told until he signed the paperwork that he would have to join the union for that university or else, basically, he couldn't work there. He was forced to pay dues for a union that really didn't do anything to affect him positively, and his only recourse was staying unemployed at that point. A right-to-work law would not allow such a thing to happen.

I hope I'm understanding that correctly, anyway.

Here's a link I found on the subject that might help.

There may also be different levels? I'm in Illinois and working at a college and I have a choice on joining the union or not, but either way I'm paying dues. As we have a decent union that works to negotiate our contracts and makes sure we don't get written up for stupid stuff, I don't mind too much as I'd rather be a member. I'm not sure if every state that has this is set up like that though (still having to pay dues) or if you don't have to pay if you don't join.

[Andara Bledin]

According to Wikipedia, Illinois isn't a Right To Work state, so you can be forced to pay the dues.

^-.-^

[Sleepwalker]

Anti union states do tend not to have other worker protections. /shrug

[smileyeagle1021]

Ah, okay. Every state I've lived in has had both, so I guess I just confused them.

The two do go together in many places.

There are many reasons to want at-will also though, yeah, when it is abused it really sucks for workers, but on the flip side, worker protection really screws employers and consumers. In a state with strong worker protection laws you can murder a customer and not be immediately fired for it because of all the hoops an employer has to jump through to fire someone.

[Shangri-laschild]

According to Wikipedia, Illinois isn't a Right To Work state, so you can be forced to pay the dues.

^-.-^

Ah, that would explain the difference then This job is my first dealing any with union stuff.