- "Right To Work" Proposed In NJ

Declan O'Scanlon is on of my local Reps. I've had a mixed experience with him. I like rep Caroline Cassagrande (pictured right) more, and our State Senator (devoted RINO) Jennifer Beck (pictured left) substantially less. But he's now done one thing which raises my estimate of him, even if it's likely to go nowhere. Declan O'Scanlon has proposed the first steps in making NJ a "right to work" state.

The problem with unions isn't the union itself per se, it's all the preferential treatment they get under the law. In NJ, the union is allowed to extract compulsory dues, even from non-members. They get all sorts of preferential treatment having to do with how a business can get rid of them, and even how the union is elected in the first place. The net effect is that a union increases the unemployment rate, by preventing non union employees from underbidding them, and by exploiting their legal advantages in a number of ways.

But if you passed a law which let employees either join the union or not, and pay the union dues or not, then the union is forced to add value for it's members and the business if they want to survive. If all they do is make the cost of labor higher while providing no additional benefit, then the market quickly forces them out. This has mostly been the case historically. But if they increase quality or productivity in exchange for their demands for higher pay, then the union thrives.

To date, unions don't have a great history of doing the latter - but I don't want to eliminate it as a possibility. It is possible that unions could evolve into something that increases quality and offers a premium service for the higher wages they extract. And if so, I have no objection to them. But if all they do is increase costs (and thanks to convoluted work rules) actually lower productivity, then they only hurt the broader economy.

Right now, employers are fleeing union dominated states for 'right to work' states. If NJ eliminated compulsory union membership, then it would increase job growth in the state - even if it's only for the public sector. If nothing else that would lower the cost of the services that government provides, delivering more for less. Even that would only help the employment picture in NJ.

The Star ledger will never tell you that, but I suspect you already know.

Everyone else does.