From an employment and labor legislative and regulatory standpoint in Michigan, it has been a very quiet year. In 2015 a flurry of Democratically backed pro-worker legislation was introduced only to be placed in “Committee” and for the most part, forgotten. This week, however, a bill was introduced by Republican Gary Glen of Midland to change Michigan public labor law to allow employees and unions to split entirely from one another. Under the current Right to Work law, employees may quit the union and not pay union dues, but the union still must represent them. Under this proposed legislation the union would no longer have to provide services to the non-union worker. Further, workers that leave the union would be allowed to deal directly with their employers on their terms and conditions of employment and compensation. Would this solve union’s biggest complaint with the current law? Would it benefit or hurt employees?
The idea of further severing the legal ties that bind workers to unions is supported by Michigan’s Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Since Right to Work was successfully passed in Michigan, one sticking point unions have continued to object to is that the Right to Work law requires the union to represent all employees in that bargaining unit whether they are paying union dues or not. Employees leaving the union have been referred to as “free riders.” These employees, by law, continue to be represented by the union even after leaving. The Worker’s Choice bill would allow the union to sever their legal obligation to provide services.
Employees exercising their right to be union free could now engage directly with their employer rather than being bound by the same terms, conditions, wages and benefits the collective bargaining employees must accept.
This legislation would primarily benefit Michigan’s public sector employees, which is significant in Michigan. According to Unionstats.com 48.4% of public employees in Michigan are currently union members. There would be little impact on private employer workers unless a similar law was passed on the federal level. Private employer unionization is covered by the National Labor Relations Act.
How This Law Would Work
The Mackinac Center Study “How Worker’s Choice Works” states that this legislation would not affect public sector union members wishing to remain members or non-union public sector employees – those that are not in a union now. This legislation would potentially impact workers that are employed by a state or municipal government in a unionized job and have opted out of membership. These employees would now be considered independent for purposes of compensation, discipline and grievance issues.
It is conjectured that the public employer would probably offer the same terms and conditions, benefits and pay that their union colleagues would receive. However, these employees would be free to negotiate their employment package.
One area the Mackinac Center study suggests may be problematic is that the current labor law states that employers are prohibited from offering conditions of employment that might steer workers away from joining a union. The proposed Michigan law addresses this by making these outside individual agreements a “prohibited subject of bargaining.” This is a labor term that denotes an area that neither side may bargain on.
Given this bill was introduced in a GOP led legislation this may move a lot quicker than the myriad of other bills that were introduced last year and are sitting in Committee waiting to die.
Source: Mackinac Center for Public Policy Press Release – Michigan Lawmaker Introduced Worker’s Choice Bill. 9/7/2016. Stats from Unionstats.com.