The case centers around whether non-union public employees can be forced to pay “fair share” or “representation” fees to unions that bargain their contracts. Right-to-work law proponents argue that unions are “political” institutions and mandatory union fees are a violation of free speech for individuals who are opposed to paying them.
The author of a recent study conducted for the pro-union Economic Policy Institute (EPI), Jeffrey Keefe, feels a high-court decision in favor of right-to-work zones could effectively lower public-employee wages around the country. Keefe’s research indicates that states adopting such “open shop” laws see government-worker wages fall between 4.4% and 11.2%, compared to non right-to-work states.
He feels this is due to decreased bargaining power on the part of unions that can’t collect the non-member fees. At a time when negotiating over healthcare and other benefits has become increasingly complex, the outcome of this decision could have important implications for organized labor.