Right to work is a very heated topic and while many people disagreed with its passing, it was a good move for the Michigan economy and workers rights.

Between 2000 and 2011, right to work states have seen an increase of 11.3 percent in the number of residents between the ages of 25-34, according to the bureau of the census. Non-right-to-work states, over that same period of time, have seen an increase of only 0.6 percent.

Between 1999 and 2009, non-farm private-sector employment grew 3.7 percent in right-to-work, but decreased 2.8 percent in non-right-to-work states. States with right-to-work laws lead the “Top States For Business”, as determined by CNBC.

For 2012, nine out of the Top 10 Best States For Business are right-to-work states. By contrast, Michigan is currently 33.

A Right to work law is an act in the United States that bans union security agreements or agreements between labor unions and employers that govern the extent to which a union requires employees’ membership and payment of union dues as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring. “Right-to-work” laws do not, as the short phrase might propose,  aim to provide a promise of employment to people looking for work, but are a government guideline of the contractual agreements between employers and labor unions to prevent them from excluding non-union workers.

On one side of the argument, the side I stand, on  are in favor of the “right to work” law passing, making Michigan one of the 24 states that supports this cause. I believe we should have this law because as a hard working American, you should have the choice of joining a union or not, an employee shouldn’t be forced to pay dues because of what their employers believe. It’s not fair that employees have to support an organization that they didn’t vote for.

Even the U.S. Supreme Court recognizes that “the Right to Work laws point to the Constitution and the right to freedom of association”.

I believe that all the rights and conditions of the workplace fought by the union, should given to every worker no matter if they are pro union or not because you should feel comfortable and safe at your place of work , it  shouldn’t matter on what you support or believe in.

I support the passing of this law because it’s unfair that the unions can make new or past employees’ join the union or pay fees for collective bargaining expanses as a requirement of employment under the said union. I don’t like that many people get fired for standing up for what they believe in. This law system doesn’t guarantee  more jobs or is a solution to making the unemployment rate go down but I believe it is an encouragement of others to work places they might not have because of the union or non-union support the employer might have had there. I’m in support of what the union does for workers’ rights and the conditions we all work in but I should have the freedom of making my own mind up on where my money goes.

Even though I don’t support the non-Right-To-Work opinion, I can understand why many people also stand behind it.

This side of the argument believes that, with the choice being left up to employees alone, is not a good idea because the benefits the union provides are given to all the workers not just the employees’ who support them, so It would be unfair if non- union members were given the same rights as the supporting and paying union members. Others, also, believe the name ” Right-To-Work” itself gives people the wrong idea from the beginning because it doesn’t give anyone the “right to work” but the right to a “free ride”. The union supporters here in Michigan believe that this law wasn’t proposed to seek the people’s advantage but to improve Michigan’s business climate. This statement is mostly true; the work force usually does improve in right to work states because people flock to jobs that open there as a result. But that’s why we needed this bill to pass, if there are no jobs for people to be hired into, people can’t choose join the union, or not to.

In conclusion, even though I support right to work, the union is something that should always be there looking out for workers but I think they should expand their spectrum to all workers’ rights not just union members. I believe that both sides on the argument have valid points but the winning side was always to pass the law. There is too many under lining facts and positives to that you can’t overlook.