Right-to-work states are more prosperous, financially well-off, and have a higher labor participation than their unionized counterparts. Unionized and non-unionized workers enjoy a better quality of life in RTW states. So why on earth would elected Republicans begin to entertain abandoning this long-held conservative position?
I was disappointed to learn that a prominent Republican U.S. Senator, who represents a fairly conservative state yet to adopt RTW protections, has changed his tune on this policy this fall.
In October, Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) appeared to have changed his tune on RTW. Per STL Today:
“The people of Missouri made their decision, and now the question is, are we going to support these workers and their struggle to keep jobs in America,” Hawley said in a radio interview with KTTN (92.3 FM) in Trenton, Missouri.
Hawley also told KZRG (1310 AM) in Joplin, "I respect that decision, and I certainly wouldn’t support any federal legislation to impose the right to work on anybody.”
Recommended
He, thankfully, hasn’t signed onto the atrocious Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act – yet. But could that change now that his view on the policy has “evolved”?
There is a schism between some union workers and bosses. Some reports reveal union workers in some Great Lakes/Rust Belt states might be open to voting GOP and be disillusioned with Democrat Party policies like the forced transition to electric vehicles (EVs). That’s fine and dandy. But who are we trying to appeal to here?
Unions, mind you, give about 90% of political donations to Democrats and are critical to their electoral success. Before any conservative embraces collective bargaining agreements, a mainstay of unions, first know what they do and invite.
One recent investigation found unions use collective bargaining agreements to impose woke ideology on teachers and students. The Defense of Freedom Institute’s January 2023 “The Corrupt Bargain” report shed light on unions being a vehicle for wokeness, writing, “Public school union bosses across the country are using an anti-democratic process of negotiating collective bargaining agreements to embed their progressive goals in school policies. In woke-filled back rooms, these unions and their supportive allies in the school districts agree to impose curricula on schools to indoctrinate students in leftist ideas, replace traditional disciplinary measures with policies that focus on “understanding” and “reconciliation,” segregate teachers for special benefits based on the color of their skin, and treat students differently based on race to ensure “equity.”
But wait, it gets better. The United Auto Workers union, which Senator Hawley (R-MO) marched alongside, just endorsed a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas conflict on December 1st, 2023.
“From opposing fascism in WWII to mobilizing against apartheid South Africa and the CONTRA war, the UAW has consistently stood for justice across the globe,” Region 9A Director Brandon Mancilla said in a press release. “That is why I am proud that the UAW International is today officially calling for a ceasefire in Israel and Palestine.”
Outreach efforts here might not prove fruitful. Why? The economy is naturally favoring non-union work arrangements—not union jobs.
Today, union jobs only account for 10.1% of the U.S. workforce–the lowest rate recorded yet–despite the Biden administration crafting policy in their favor and “historic” organizing campaigns.
Despite this downward trend, some “conservative” groups try to make unions flourish. One called American Compass, helmed by a former Mitt Romney for President staffer who admonishes free market principles is largely behind this push for “pro-labor conservatism.”
The group released a manifesto, "Rebuilding American Capitalism: A Handbook for Conservative Policymakers.” What does it specifically call for? “The American labor movement’s slow descent into obsolescence has deprived American workers of a vital institution,” it reads. “A well-functioning system of organized labor affords solidarity, mutual aid, bargaining power, and workplace representation, all of which can benefit workers, their families and communities, and the nation—both economically and socially.”
Among its many economically left policy prescriptions is to “guarantee workers’ legal right to organize” by increasing “use of temporary injunctive relief to immediately reinstate workers fired for legally protected organizing activity and establish clear guidelines and rapid processes for seeking that relief.” This sounds similar to the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act – a misguided pro-labor bill to repeal right-to-work and forcibly unionize all workers. Hard pass from this conservative.
As Capital Research’s Michael Watson observed, “The manifesto calls upon conservative policymakers to enact enormous worldwide tariffs to constrain consumer choice, develop a broad-based system of central planning (er, “industrial policy”), raise taxes on financial transactions and business debts, and adopt the European model of “sectoral bargaining” in labor relations for which the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has advocated.”
Who backs this “pro-union” conservative group? When looking at foundations that financially back it, observers will see these entities are progressive–not conservative. Influence Watch reports one of its donors is the lefty William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
“In 2020, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation reported providing $611,000 in combined grants to American Compass. Created by one of the co-founders of Hewlett-Packard, the Hewlett Foundation has a consistent history of funding socially liberal and environmentalist organizations and projects, with major recipients including the ClimateWorks Foundation, Planned Parenthood, and Arabella Advisors’ New Venture Fund,” Watson explained in an August 2021 National Review article.
He also noted that Pierre Omidyar of the Omidyar Nexus is a backer of American Compass.
Conservatives can absolutely broaden their reach to any open-minded voter or constituency. But that doesn’t require abandoning traditionally-held economic views like the right to work. Be skeptical of those packaging economic progressivism as conservatism.
