Client Alerts & Insights
“Right-to-Work” Momentum Building in 2017
February 10, 2017
Authored By:
In the early months of 2017, right-to-work legislation continues to garner significant attention as a number of states explore legislation. In early January, Kentucky passed legislation prohibiting employers from entering agreements that make union membership and the payment of union dues a condition of keeping or maintaining employment. Missouri followed suit one month later on February 6 by passing its own similar legislation, thereby becoming the 28th “right-to-work” state. In addition to making it illegal to condition employment on the payment of dues to a union, both laws included a grandfather clause protecting existing contracts negotiated before the laws become effective. Additionally, right-to-work legislation has passed the Senate in New Hampshire and is set for a vote in the state’s House of Representatives. On February 9, the House Labor Committee recommended voting against passage of the bill, which will see a vote of the full chamber next week. Governor Chris Sununu supports right-to-work legislation. The proposed legislation would make New Hampshire the first right-to-work state in the Northeast.
In addition to states acting on their own right-to-work agendas after the 2016 election, Congress has revived discussions regarding a national right-to-work bill. Representatives Joe Wilson (R. S.C.) and Steve King (R. Iowa) introduced legislation that would prohibit workers from being required to support a union or pay union dues. Representatives Wilson and King introduced similar legislation in 2015. The current iteration would amend the National Labor Relations Act and the Railway Labor Act to prohibit security clauses that require all employees in a unionized workplace to join a union or pay a fee as a condition of employment. For the past eight years, such legislation stood no chance of overcoming President Barack Obama’s inevitable veto, but President Donald Trump has publicly favored right-to-work legislation.
In addition, local right-to-work ordinances are currently being litigated in the Midwest. In November 2016, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that local right-to-work ordinances were lawful “state law” and not preempted or invalidated by the NLRA because such ordinances did not conflict with state law. However, in January 2017, the Northern District of Illinois rejected a similar local ordinance holding that it did not qualify as state law.
Overall, right-to-work legislation is gaining steam early in 2017 and the attention should continue into the summer and beyond. Right-to-work will be worth monitoring as it develops moving forward.
If you have any questions on this topic please contact a member of our Labor & Employment Practice Group.
Eric Baisden at ebaisden@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4676.
Adam Primm at aprimm@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4451.
Latest News
DOJ’s National Fraud Enforcement Division Issues Corporate Enforcement Directive, Signaling Heightened Scrutiny of Corporate Fraud
DOJ’s new enforcement framework reinforces that corporate fraud investigations will remain a significant enforcement priority, particularly in healthcare, government contracting, tax and international trade.
Lessons from Kai Spears v. The New York Times Co.: A Historic Defamation Verdict
The first defamation verdict against The New York Times in more than 50 years highlights the significant litigation risks that can arise when reporting relies on inadequately vetted anonymous sources and critical editorial safeguards are not followed.
Back To Wright Line: NLRB Resets Standards for Workplace Misconduct
Employers have regained greater flexibility to address offensive or abusive employee conduct that occurs during union activity or other activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act. On September 23, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) issued a significant decision in Lion Elastomers LLC, 375 NLRB No. 41, restoring the prior standard for evaluating discipline when employee misconduct occurs during protected concerted activity from General Motors LLC, 369 NLRB No. 127.
Can an Algorithm Commit a Tort? The Circuit Split Over Section 230
A growing circuit split is reshaping the scope of Section 230 immunity. While the Fourth and Ninth Circuits continue to view algorithmic recommendations as protected publisher conduct, the Third Circuit has taken a narrower approach, holding that certain algorithm-driven content recommendations may constitute a platform’s own conduct and therefore fall outside Section 230’s protections.