Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 73, Issue 3, pp 231–243 | Cite as

A New Approach to Resolving the Right-to-work Ethical Dilemma

  • Helen LamEmail author
  • Mark Harcourt
OriginalPaper

Abstract

Union security has long been an industrial relations controversy. While compulsory unionism supporters say it benefits the working class, right-to-work advocates denounce it as an unethical infringement of individual rights and freedom. Unfortunately, neither side has adequately addressed the shortcomings of their viewpoint, nor the broader worker concerns about effective representation beyond just “unionism”. In this paper, we examine the ethical and practical problems of compulsory (union security) and voluntary (right-to-work) unionism and propose a new resolution, compulsory proportional representation, that has the advantages of: (a) ensuring workers’ freedom to associate or not associate, (b) promoting freedom to contract, (c) allowing free competition in representation in line with anti-trust principles, (d) improving industrial peace and efficiency, (e) enhancing fairness and social justice, and (f) addressing the employer–employee power imbalance. It is superior to either voluntary unionism, which often lead to management unilateralism, or compulsory unionism, where workers are compelled to join unions against their will.

Keywords

Compulsory unionism freedom of association right-to-work union security voluntary unionism worker representation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams J. S. (1965). Inequity in Social Exchange. In: Berkowitz L. (ed), Advance Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2. Academic Press, NY, pp. 267–299Google Scholar
  2. Baird C. W. (1992). The Permissible Use of Forced Union Dues from Hanson to Beck. Government Union Review 13(3):1–55Google Scholar
  3. Baird C. W. (2000). Unions and Antitrust. Journal of Labor Research 21(4):586–600Google Scholar
  4. Baird C. W. (2004). Labor Relations Law. Government Union Review and Public Policy Digest 21(3):9–28Google Scholar
  5. Banducci S. A., Jeffrey A. K. (1999). Perceptions of Fairness and Support for Proportional Representation. Political Behavior 21(3):217–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker G. (1964). Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education. Columbia University Press, NY.Google Scholar
  7. Beer M., Spector B., Lawrence P. R., Mills D. Q., Walton R. E. (1984). Managing Human Assets. The Free Press, NYGoogle Scholar
  8. Biagi, M.: 1998. Report on Six National Case Studies in the Field of Freedom of Association, Retrieved September 15, 2005 at International Labour Organization Bureau for Workers’ Activities,  < http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/actrav/learn/global/freedom1.htm >  and  < http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/actrav/learn/global/freedom2.htm > 
  9. Boston J., Church S., Bale T. (2003). The Impact of Proportional Representation on Government Effectiveness: The New Zealand Experience. Australian Journal of Public Administration 62(4):7–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boxall P. (2003). Evaluating Continuity and Change in the Employment Relations Act 2000. New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations 26(1):27–44Google Scholar
  11. Bryson A., Gomez R., Gunderson M., Meltz N. (2005). Youth-Adult Differences in the Demand for Unionization: Are American, British, and Canadian Workers All That Different?. Journal of Labor Research 26(1):155–167Google Scholar
  12. Chaison G. N., Dhavale D. G. (1992). The Choice Between Union Membership and Free-Rider Status. Journal of Labor Research 13(4):355–369Google Scholar
  13. Crawford A., Harbridge R., Hince K. (1998). Unions and Union Membership in New Zealand: Annual Review for 1997. New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations 23(3):191–198Google Scholar
  14. Crawford A., Harbridge R., Walsh P. (2000). Unions & Union Membership in New Zealand: Annual Review for 1999. New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations 25(3):291–302Google Scholar
  15. Deery S., Walsh J. (1999). The Character of Individualised Employment Relations in Australia: A Model of ‘Hard’ HRM. In: Deery S., Mitchell R. (eds), Employment Relations: Individualisation and Union Exclusion. Federation Press, Sydney, Australia, pp. 115–129Google Scholar
  16. Delaney J. T. (1998). Redefining the Right-to-Work Debate: Unions and the Dilemma of Free Choice. Journal of Labor Research 14(3):425–442Google Scholar
  17. Deutch M. (1975). Equity, Equality, and Need: What Determines Which Values Will be Used as the Basis of Distributive Justice. Journal of Social Issues 31(3):137–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Drucker P. (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. Harper Collins, NYGoogle Scholar
  19. European Industrial Relations Observatory Online: 1999.␣Trade Union Membership and Density in the 1990s, Retrieved June 24, 2005 at  < http://www.eiro.eurofound.eu.int/1999/08/feature/de9908 113f.html > 
  20. European Parliament: 2005. Charter of Fundamental␣Rights of the European Union, Retrieved September␣19, 2005 at Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms␣and␣Rights, Justice and Home Affairs – Freedom, Security, and Justice: An Agenda for Europe,  < http://www.europarl.eu.int/comparl/libe/elsj/charter/art12/default_en.htm > 
  21. Fairris D. (2002). Are Transformed Workplaces More Productively Efficient? Journal of Economic Issues 36(3):659–670Google Scholar
  22. Findlaw for Legal Professionals, Thomson: 2005. U.S. Constitution: First Amendment, Retreived September 16, 2005 at  < http://www.supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/amendment01/12.html > 
  23. Fischer M., Hunter R. P. (2000). Religious Liberty and Compulsory Unionism: A Worker’s Guide to Using Union Dues for Charity. Mackinac Centre for Public Policy, Midland, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  24. Frege C.M. (2002). A Critical Assessment of the Theoretical and Empirical Research on German Works Council. British Journal of Industrial Relations 40(2):221–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Friedman M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  26. Harbridge R., Crawford A., Kiely P. (1998). Employment Contracts: Bargaining Trends & Employment Law Update 1997/98. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  27. Harbridge R., Wilkinson D. (2001). Free Riding: Trends in Collective Bargaining Coverage and Union Membership Levels in New Zealand. Labor Studies Journal 26(3):51–72Google Scholar
  28. Harbridge R., Walsh P., Wilkinson D. (2002). Re-regulation and Union Decline in New Zealand: Likely Effects. New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations 27(1):65–77Google Scholar
  29. Haynes P., Boxall P. (2004). Free Riding in New Zealand: Incidence, Motives and Policy Implications. Labour and Industry 15(3):47–63Google Scholar
  30. Haynes P., Vowles J., Boxall P. (2005). Explaining the Younger–Older Worker Union Density Gap: Evidence from New Zealand. British Journal of Industrial Relations 43(1):93–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hilgert R. L., Young J. D. (1963). Right-to-work Legislation – Examination of Related Issues and Effects. Personnel Journal 42(11):549–559Google Scholar
  32. Hirschman A. O. (1970). Exit, Voice and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  33. Hubler O., Jirjahn U. (2003). Works Councils and Collective Bargaining in Germany: The Impact on Productivity and Wages. Scottish Journal of Policical Economy 50(4):471–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kaufman B. E. (2001). The Future of U.S. Private Sector Unionism: Did George Barnett Get It Right After All? Journal of Labor Research 22(3):433–457Google Scholar
  35. Lijphart A. (1999). Australian Democracy: Modifying Majoritarianism? Australian Journal of Political Science 34(3):323–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Manon, H.: 2004. Union Membership in Canada – 2004, Workplace Gazette 7(3):42–48, Retrieved March 2, 2006 at  < http://www.110.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/millieudetravail_workplace/gazette/pdf/en/Union%20Membership%20in%20Canada%20%2D%202004%2DE7.pdf >  (2 March 2006)
  37. McAndrew I, Ballard M. (1995). Negotiation and Dictation in Employment Contract Formation in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations 20(2):119–141Google Scholar
  38. McLaughlin C., Rasmussen E. (1998). ‘Freedom of Choice’ and ‘Flexibility’ in the Retail Sector? International Journal of Manpower19(4):281–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McLean, A.: 2006. Winner-take all System Challenged, Edmonton Journal (February 5), A6Google Scholar
  40. Mitchnick M. B. (1993). Recent Development in Compulsory Unionism. International Labour Review 132(4):453–468Google Scholar
  41. Olson M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  42. Peetz, D.: 1997. The Paradigm Shift in Australian Union Membership: A Tale of Compulsory Unionism, in Proceedings of the Association of Industrial Relations Academics of Australia and New Zealand Conference (Brisbane, Australia)Google Scholar
  43. Petro S. (1957). Compulsory Unionism and Responsible Unionism. Labor Law Journal 8(12):868–873Google Scholar
  44. Rawls J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  45. Richie R., Hill S. (1996a). Equalizing the Vote (Proportional Representation). The Nation 263(11):6–7Google Scholar
  46. Richie R., Hill S. (1996b). Proportional Representation. Social Policy 26(4):25–37Google Scholar
  47. Rose J. B., Chaison G. N. (2001). Unionism in Canada and the United States in the 21st Century: The Prospects for Revival. Relations Industrielle/Industrial Relations 56(1):34–65Google Scholar
  48. Ryan, R.: 1996. Employment Relations in Hotels, Cafes␣and Restaurants: Summary of Survey Results, Working Paper 3/96, Industrial Relations Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  49. Seligson H. (1959). The Paradox and Challenge of Unionism Today. Labor Law Journal 10(3):180–187Google Scholar
  50. Taras D.G., Ponak A. (2001). Mandatory Agency Shop Laws As an Explanation of Canada-U.S. Union Density Divergence. Journal of Labor Research 22(3):541–568Google Scholar
  51. Waring, P.: 2000. Individualism and Collectivism in Contemporary Employment Relations: The Australian Black Coal Mining Industry Experience. Unpublished␣doctoral dissertation, University of Newcastle, AustraliaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Innovative ManagementAthabasca UniversitySt. AlbertCanada
  2. 2.Department of Strategy and Human Resource ManagementUniversity of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations