[Jensson]

But that just makes right to work seem even better, EU where workers don't need to pay unions to get rights still pay their unions and are way more willing to join unions. So to me demonising right to work doesn't make sense, California could add those worker protections if they wanted, I see no reason at all why they need workers to give up their rights so that unions can take their money.

[tchaffee]

You need the strong labor laws first which the US does not have. Right to work in the US is popular in states with the worst labor laws and mostly the poor states.

Right to work could be good under the right conditions. Which the EU already largely has. In fact many EU countries have far stronger labor laws than the EU laws themselves. That's the context within which right to work starts to make sense.

[Jensson]

If you have the power to take away right to work from your workers then you also have the power to give them good conditions like paid vacation instead. I see no reason ever why you would remove right to work in that situation instead of just legislating proper worker rights, except to feed unions.

[tchaffee]

> I see no reason ever why you would remove right to work in that situation instead of just legislating proper worker rights, except to feed unions.

The massive wealth gaps in the US tell the actual story. Corporations have a huge influence over US law and the laws mostly benefit the corporations over individuals or unions. That's one of the dangers of massive wealth. You can just buy the government. Which has already happened in the US.