4 ms·
I'm confused about the distinction. How can a worker be forced to join a union in the absence of an agreement between the company and the union to only hire un
by vonmoltke 8y ago
I'm confused about the distinction. How can a worker be forced to join a union in the absence of an agreement between the company and the union to only hire union workers?
If you are thinking of "closed shops", companies where the union has a security agreement with the company and the union is free to deny membership to a person (thereby denying them employment), those were deemed illegal everywhere under US federal labor law.
- TheCoelacanth 8y ago> I'm confused about the distinction. How can a worker be forced to join a union in the absence of an agreement between the company and the union to only hire union workers? A worker can't be forced to join a union even in the presence of such an agreement. The company simply agreed not to hire them if they don't join.
- vonmoltke 8y agoI feel like you are playing semantics here. "Forced to join a union" in this discussion is in the context of "in order to get a job at Company X". Of course this worker is free to forego employment at Company X if they don't like the terms of the employment. However, one of those terms forces the worker to join a particular union. Taken to its logical conclusion, this semantic distinction could be used to justify eliminating just about any worker protection currently on the books.