Aaron Ford wants to be Nevada’s next governor. He also wants to make state workers indentured servants by forcing them to join labor unions. This is a particularly pernicious and self-defeating proposal gussied up as a means of empowering employees. It is anything but.
For 75 years, Nevada has been a right-to-work state, meaning employees can’t be compelled to become union members or pay union dues as a condition of holding a job. But as union membership has cratered in recent decades — particularly in the private sector — Big Labor has become increasingly aggressive in its search for more dues-paying members, pushing the concept of mandatory unions by seeking to undermine or abolish right-to-work laws in the 27 states that have them on the books.
Mr. Ford, Nevada’s attorney general and the front-runner for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, has now revealed himself to be a loyal foot soldier in the campaign to conscript Nevada employees in service to union bosses. The Nevada Independent reported this week that, in a December podcast hosted by construction worker union leaders, Mr. Ford asserted that he would eagerly sign legislation embracing compulsory union membership.
“The moment you send it to me — first term, I ain’t waiting,” Mr. Ford said. “It can be done legislatively. They can send me a bill. And if they send it to me, I’m signing it.”
In a later statement, the Independent wrote, Mr. Ford said repealing the law would help restore workers’ rights: “As Senate majority leader, I fought to extend collective bargaining rights to Nevada state employees. Nevada’s world-class workers built the middle class — and I will honor their hard work for our state by being the most pro-worker governor in our state’s history.”
That’s all well and good, but Mr. Ford’s thoughts on right-to-work are anything but pro-worker. Rather, they are an affront to freedom of association and they advocate for limiting rather than expanding choices for employees. Of course workers have a right to join a union if they so choose. But freedom runs both ways. Or do progressives — whose agenda is based almost entirely on government coercion — believe the “right to choose” applies only to abortion? Forcing employees to financially support or join organizations that engage in political activities they oppose is an affront to the First Amendment. It is autocratic, not democratic.
Mr. Ford and other left-wing critics of right-to-work laws typically cite the unfairness of “free-riders,” nonunion workers who nevertheless benefit from labor contracts. But this is the result of the monopoly unions hold on the right to collectively negotiate employment terms in union shops. Eliminating that protection would allow nonunion employees to effectively represent themselves while those who freely join the union would still remain subject to the negotiated labor deal.
Besides empowering workers to make their own decisions about union membership, right-to-work laws also bring economic benefits. They tend to “have a positive impact on employment rates, labor markets, job creation and union accountability,” Americans for Prosperity notes. In addition, “by respecting worker preferences — not one-size-fits-all union demands — companies can grow, adapt to change and create more opportunities for employees.”
It should be noted that, nationally, Democrats receive around 85 percent of all union political contributions. Is it any wonder that they’re often eager to help labor organizations fill their coffers with the increased dues that might be generated by mandatory union enrollment?
Rather than advocate that the government trample free speech and association rights by conscripting unwilling employees into labor organizations, Mr. Ford would be better off helping his union supporters increase their ranks the old-fashioned way: by offering services and benefits that workers will pay for voluntarily.
