| Almost! They do two things. 1. Make it illegal to have an exclusivity contract. 2. Make every concession that a union gets out of their employer apply to non-union employees. [1] This would be like Dole getting a special deal with Whole Foods... And a "Right-to-sell" law would mandate that the terms of that agreement would also apply to me - even though I was not a party to those negotiations. > I was under the impression that a majority of the workers of a company can unionise and then require every other worker in the company to join the union. That would be the case in a truly free market, if the employer entered into an agreement with the union that going forward, it would only employ union people. The employer's not compelled to do that - it does so by choice. > If you are correct then I can see why right to work laws are not so good. However, keep in mind that there are many laws preventing people from entering certain contracts. Such as laws forbidding a person to work at a company if the company doesn't want to pay minimum wage, or offering to give someone some money but requiring that they pay back a large amount in a set amount of time. I agree. You have rights, some of which you can't sign away - for instance, it would be illegal to discriminate against someone based on race, despite the existence of a contract to the contrary. Contracts aren't entirely absolute, and this gets complicated quickly. There's also questions of monopolies, which libertarians generally do not oppose, but other people do. [1] The obvious consequence is that the game-theory optimal strategy for everyone is to not join a union. |