Sen. Rand Paul submits national "right to work" (for less) bill


unions gave us

Via Paul's web site, this lovely press release:

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Sen. Rand Paul this week introduced the National Right to Work Act, S. 204, which seeks to preserve and protect the free choice of individual employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, or to refrain from such activities.

"Every American worker deserves the right to freedom of association - and I am concerned that the 26 states that allow forced union membership and dues infringes on these workers' rights," Sen. Paul said. "Right to work laws ensure that all Americans are given the choice to refrain from joining or paying dues to a union as a condition for employment. Nearly 80 percent of all Americans support the principles and so I have introduced a national Right to Work Act that will require all states to give their workers the freedom to choose."

Sen. Paul's Right to Work Act does not add a single word to existing federal law, it simply deletes forced unionism provisions in federal law.

Due to six infringing and freedom-crushing provisions in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Railway Labor Act (RLA), there are currently 8 million working Americans who are required by law to pay union dues. These workers are not required to join a workers union but they are required to pay the dues; and if workers refuse to pay these union fees, they risk losing their jobs to Big Labor.

As you can see, Rand Paul is all about FREEDOM! What happened to being all about jobs? And fairness? And equality? And freedom to, you know, bargain? And having decent working conditions? And pay?

But see, as he introduces the idea of a new national "right to work" (right to work for less) bill, his emphasis is on FREEDOM! Did I mention FREEDOM?

freedom my ass

And don't get me started on "choice."

As NH Labor News reminds us:

They already have the freedom to pay the representation fee instead of joining.

This is exactly the opposite to everything we are taught to believe in the democratic process.  We can have all the debate we want but in the end, the majority rules.  Now they are taking the minority and placing them ahead of the majority.

This is an ideological and blatantly  anti-union piece of legislation.

It's worth repeating that it is already illegal to force someone to join a union.

But if FREEDOM of choice is so important to Rand Paul, why isn't he a proponent of women's reproductive rights?

rand paul on abortion

The text of the legislation is at Paul's site.

  • TurboKitty

    I don't live in his district and I wouldn't have voted for him if I did however, if I could vote for him, I would vote him OFF the island ...

  • Sally

    Freedom in the Paul mind refers only to the freedom of rich white guys to set the rules, enforce the rules, and piss on everyone else. I just got a job in my school system that pays barely minimum wage (inmagine what it might pay without the union?) Even though Snyder rammed through his RTW law, it is not yet in force, so I had the choice to pay .1% of my pay for full representation, or .8% for a penalty. I joined, but I must say since I am working only 8.52 hours a week (the 55 minute classes I help are only paid at 55 minutes) it did make me angry at first. And the other union rule that will hurt me is that one must have 140 days in the current school year before one gets bumped up to the next pay grade. I won't get there, so if I do this again, I will make $7.86/hour again next year. No mileage (I am at two schools, and my day is broken up between a morning class and an afternoon one) and no benefits, obviously. My paycheck was for $110 for two weeks. I was talking to a substitute the other day (who makes the same $10/hr. I did 25 years ago in this system!) and he said, "Well, we can't expect the taxpayers to pay teachers $100,000 a year." What? My husband makes that as an engineer, and you can bet we taxpayers help his salary every time our town gives the chemical company another tax abatement.