The right-to-work, “worker-freedom” saga continues to rage in Michigan, as it also trickles over into other states, and the extremity of union thuggery is reaching a tipping point, as protesters spew spiteful warnings while threatening their bosses with their lives.
It’s quite the scenario. That is, a conglomerate of purportedly entitled whiners complaining about having the choice to join a union, and not being forced to pay dues for something they don’t even care to pay for. The commentators are running wild. Adam Ozimek, for example, thinks bipartisanship is the answer, or something like that:
Conservatives are elated and liberals are upset today as Michigan became a right-to-work state. While their reactions may be different, what both sides have in common is they are both employing confusing rhetoric. For conservatives, all of the sudden a worker’s ability to choose their terms of employment has become a right. If we were talking about a law that mandated firms must give workers the right to choose how many days of vacation they received, would conservatives be applauding it as an increase in worker freedom, or criticizing it as the state intervening in the right to freedom of contract? Similarly, liberals find themselves in the strange position defending contracts that limit worker choice. But really both are misunderstanding how right-to-work affects free exchange.
I’m not sure why Mr. Ozimek is “confused” by the rhetoric of both sides, when conservatives remain very clear in their assertions. Conservatives would, at least I would hope so, stand up for their ideology even if businesses were forced to provide workers the right to choose how many days of vacation they receive.
If anything, the liberal ideology in the matter is confusing. Conservatives brand right to work laws as “worker freedom.” Comparatively, liberals brand right to work as an assault on freedom — or, rather, non-right to work states keep workers “free.”
The latter is the only political group that is spoiled in confused rhetoric. Union despotism stands in diametric opposition to worker freedom.