So-Called
“Right to Work”
It’s Not What You Think
The term “Right to Work” was promoted by anti-worker, anti-union interests to put a positive label on a policy that weakens unions and the working people they support. The name sounds like it protects opportunity, but the real impact is to reduce workers’ ability to stand together for fair wages, strong benefits, and safe jobsites.
On the surface, So-Called “Right to Work” laws restrict worker security agreements between unions and employers. In practice, these laws undermine union resources and power, making it harder to enforce contracts, defend workers’ rights and maintain the standards that support middle-class careers.
So-Called “Right to Work” laws hurt unions and working families
The “Right to Work” for lower wages and lesser benefits
According to the Economic Policy Institute, workers in So-Called “Right to Work states are paid 3.1 percent less than workers in non-RTW states — about $1,670 less per year for a full-time worker. Also, fewer workers in these states have employer-sponsored health insurance and pensions compared to workers in states without So-Called “Right to Work laws.
Across many measures, states with So-Called “Right to Work” laws also show weaker outcomes for working people and communities. Data from the U.S. Department of Labor and the U.S. Census Bureau has been cited to show that RTW states experience higher workplace fatality rates and higher poverty, along with worse outcomes in areas like education funding and health indicators.
Federal law already prohibits any American from being forced to join a union. So-Called “Right to Work” laws do not create new rights—they are designed to weaken unions and reduce the protections unions provide.