Judge Rules Wisconsin's Right To Work Statute Illegal -- Now What?

Forbes ^ | April 20, 2016 | George Leef

[reaganaut1]

Just over a year ago, Wisconsin became the 25th state to adopt a “right to work” law, as states are allowed to do under Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947.

Many people misunderstand what the phrase “right to work” (RTW) means. A RTW law does not guarantee anyone a job. Nor does it damage or prohibit unions, as Big Labor advocates often suggest. All that a RTW law does is to deny the validity of collective bargaining contract clauses that require the company to fire a worker because he or she refuses to pay the union dues.

But allowing any worker in the bargaining unit to opt out of paying is intolerable to unions, which are every bit as interested in revenue maximization as any business. Just because they are nominally non-profit doesn’t mean that union officials don’t want to pull in every dollar they can. That is why they fight tooth and nail against RTW in any state and would dearly love to repeal Section 14(b) if they could, coming very close in 1966 and 1978.

Once a state has enacted RTW, the unions will try almost anything to reverse that, with litigation being a preferred tactic — which brings us back to the Badger State. Opponents of RTW there (i.e., advocates of compulsory unionism) filed a lawsuit in which they argued that the law violates the state’s constitution. Of course, they were savvy enough to file in a friendly court and on April 8, Dane County judge William Foust ruled that the law was invalid.

So, why is RTW illegal in Wisconsin?

Judge Foust states that under RTW, “a free-rider problem is born – the ability of nonmembers to refuse to pay for services unions are compelled to provide by law.”

[Richard Axtell]

Appeal, get a ruling, back to sanity.

[Some Fat Guy in L.A.]

Pure politics played from the bench by a rat judge.