LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Why right to work does not work

In response to the commentary, “Court ruling a game-changer for mandatory union dues” by John Stapleford published on Sept. 7.

The Supreme Court heard Janus v. AFSCME in 2017 and ruled that workers should not be constitutionally required to unionize. The immorality of right to work must be addressed. Let’s reflect on the U.S. motto, e pluribus unum: out of many, one. These 13 letters represent how 13 colonies came together to achieve what they wanted.

This same saying applies to unionization. Together, people can collectively bargain for better wages, more benefits, and legal representation. The National Labor Relations Act defends this right for all, and the law written has defended the right to opt out of union dues, instead paying a reduced fee for basic coverage.

By completely opting out of unions, workers’ dues will increase, union powers will decrease, and wages will decrease. EPI Studies show that wages in right-to-work states are, on average, 3.1 percent lower than those in states without it. Furthermore, in Oklahoma, it has been shown that right-to-work did not impact employment at all.

With right to work, the power of corporations to cheat workers increases and silences average laborers. Right-to-work supporters tend to polarize the issue to political lobbying and leave folks ambiguous to the true work of unions, such as Social Security. Say no to right to work.

Ali Mahdi
Lewes

You are encouraged to leave relevant comments but engaging in personal attacks, threats, online bullying or commercial spam will not be allowed. All comments should remain within the bounds of fair play and civility. (You can disagree with others courteously, without being disagreeable.) Feel free to express yourself but keep an open mind toward finding value in what others say. To report abuse or spam, click the X in the upper right corner of the comment box.