Maine policymakers want to encourage good job skills and higher wages for working people. Unions have done just that. By providing higher wages and protection against arbitrary treatment, American unions improve the living standards of the middle class. Labor unions are a training ground for citizenship through the practice of participatory democracy. Union members can be found on school boards, town councils and civic organizations all over Maine.
Yet, some legislators are attacking union and worker job security by trying to outlaw union security clauses freely negotiated in labor contracts. One onerous bill seeking to outlaw union security clauses is LD 489, “An Act To Ensure the Right To Work without Payment of Dues or Fees to a Labor Union as a Condition of Employment,” which claims to protect the “right to work” by making union dues voluntary. The bill would undermine collective bargaining. A more apt description for the bill would be the “right to be fired” or “right to work for less.”
Absent a labor agreement or a violation of narrow civil rights laws, the employment relationship under our laws is generally “at will.” An employee’s right to work can be terminated at any time. An employee can be fired for any or no reason. In larger companies, a “just cause” clause in the union contract ordinarily protects an employee’s right not to be fired “at will” for arbitrary reasons.
Union security clauses are contractual agreements that allow paycheck dues collections from covered employees. Such clauses are routine, well-accepted elements of American labor relations. They raise the resources necessary to protect the membership in negotiations, grievances and arbitrations.
They ensure just working conditions and fair pay. The dues check-off, where everyone in the unit contributes a few dollars from each paycheck, is the fairest method of collecting funding. This arrangement is the subject of bargaining, must be agreed to by both the elected union and the employer, and is supervised and regulated by the government.
The economic benefits of union representation far outweigh the amount of dues collected.
A labor organization has a statutory duty to represent everyone in the bargaining unit. It takes money to run an organization, whether it’s a church, a club or a union. Dues pay for contract negotiations, office and support services, legal services, union communications and training for stewards and members.
To deny the right of employees and employers to negotiate a security clause and dues check-off would weaken the labor organizations’ ability to do their statutory job. This is because some in the unit may be “free riders” who decide not to pay union dues, even though they would continue to get the job security, wages and benefits of union representation. As Maine AFL-CIO Executive Director Matt Schlobohm has said, it would be like a town voting to provide services, but also declaring property taxes voluntary.
The goal of LD 489 is to weaken and eliminate unions, with the claim that doing so will attract business. But what kind of business? The kind that pays low wages and wants total arbitrary discretion over job security.
There is no persuasive evidence that abolishing union security clauses in union contracts is an important factor in attracting business. Instead, workforce availability and quality rank much higher in driving business location decisions.
The real earnings of American workers have been flat-lined for over 20 years, and escalating income inequality is now an existential crisis in our country. This is not a time to join the “race to bottom” in terms of wages.
In states that don’t allow union security clauses, the average worker earns nearly $6,000 a year, or about 12 percent, less than workers in states without these laws.
Is this the direction we want for Maine?
We should instead look at the example of our proud, skilled shipbuilders at Bath Iron Works who get contracts because of quality workmanship and finishing jobs ahead of schedule. The higher wages are justified. And job security protected by their contract maintains that stability and pride. The same is true with the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery and other industries where the right to collective bargaining has helped workers and workplaces succeed. Fair collective bargaining practices, and stable labor relations, are good for business.
Maine has repeatedly rejected extreme anti-worker agendas that undercut our prosperity. We are ready to do it again.
Rep. Ralph Tucker, D-Brunswick, represents House District 50. He is a former labor lawyer and retired Maine District Court judge.