West Virginia labor organizations are mounting a legal challenge to the state’s right-to-work law. Friday, Kanawha County Circuit Court Judge Jennifer Bailey heard both sides in the debate over whether the law passed by the Legislature earlier this year making West Virginia the 26th right-to-work state is legal.
The labor unions argue, and not without merit, that if a union represents workers for wages, benefits and in other employment issues that the worker should have to pay for those benefits, otherwise those services for free constitute an illegal taking.
Union attorney Bob Bastress said, “What Senate Bill 1 (the right-to-work-bill) does is create a clique to get workplace services for nothing while forcing others to pay for these free riders.” He added that it will weaken unions. “The more free riders the less the union will have to spend… I think it’s fair to say the right-to-work laws are designed to limit the political activity of unions.”
Supporters of right-to-work may not admit it, but cutting into union clout is a motivation. Just look at the most recent election where unions spent heavily to run scathing ads to try to oust Republicans who supported right-to-work.
However, assistant attorney general Gilbert Dickey, who argued in support of the law, said employees deserve the right to choose whether or not to belong to a union. “The right to participate in a union cannot be construed as a further right to compel other employees.”
Additionally, unions do not have to serve as the exclusive bargaining agent in a workplace. The union can instead have a members-only agreement with the employer, leaving non-union members to make their own arrangements with the company. Those arrangements have been consistently upheld by the courts.
Ultimately, whether or not West Virginia or any other state has a right-to-work law is a public policy decision by the people’s representatives. For years, conservative West Virginia politicians wanted to pass a right-to-work law, but they didn’t have the political clout. Democratic opponents, who held the Governor’s office and the majorities in the Legislature, wouldn’t hear of it.
However, the changing of the political landscape empowered Republican majorities in the House and Senate to finally pass the bill, and even override a gubernatorial veto. It would be an overreach for Judge Bailey (or the state Supreme Court) to override the Legislature’s prerogative unless unions can establish that right-to-work is unconstitutional.
Historically, the courts in other states where right-to-work laws have passed have not done that.
It’s understandable that labor unions here would fight hard at every level to oppose right-to-work, and the courts are a logical route. However, the issue was settled earlier this year when the Legislature passed the law.
The real battleground for the labor unions on this issue is at the ballot box.