Rep. Steven Kesselring: Right-to-work will make NH stronger and union's more accountable
NH Union Leader newspaper

The New Hampshire Union Leader newspaper published an Op/Ed in favor of Right to Work today, by Representative Steven Kesselring of Manchester:

"AS A LEGISLATOR, I understand the responsibility of making decisions that directly impact our communities. The debate over House Bill 238 has been particularly intense. Currently, state law allows unions to collect mandatory fees from employees in unionized workplaces, even if those workers choose not to join the union. Some argue that unions need this government-sanctioned control to effectively serve their members. I disagree. I support this legislation because I believe workers should have the freedom to decide whether to financially support a union.

The history of labor relations in the United States reveals the complexity of the issue, which involves rights and responsibilities that govern how workers interact with unions. The Railway Labor Act of 1926 and the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 laid the groundwork for collective bargaining and union membership, allowing unions to collect fees from non-members under certain conditions. However, these frameworks have evolved, especially with the passage of the 1947 Labor Management Relations Act, which opened the door for states to enact so-called “right-to-work” laws that prohibit compulsory union dues.

Most recently, the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Janus v. AFSCME fundamentally shifted the landscape by affirming that public-sector employees cannot be compelled to pay union fees, citing violations of First Amendment rights. This ruling underscored a critical point: the importance of individual choice in the workplace, a constitutionally sound tenet of the legislative process.

Yet, while public-sector employees in New Hampshire enjoy this right, private-sector employees are not granted the same protections. This inconsistency raises serious questions about fairness and equal treatment under the law. In a state that prides itself on individual freedoms, it is unacceptable that some workers are still compelled to surrender part of every paycheck to the union, while others are not.

A ban on compulsory union dues in New Hampshire is not only justified but necessary. HB 238 would align our state laws with established federal principles, ensuring that all employees, regardless of the sector in which they work, are afforded the same rights to choose whether or not to support a union financially. This legislation would safeguard individual freedoms and promote an environment where workers are empowered to make decisions that best suit their circumstances.

Beyond the obvious ethical and legal considerations, we should factor in the economic benefits of banning compulsory union dues, which are significant. Studies have shown that governments that enact what some states refer to as“right-to-work” laws experience stronger economic growth, higher job creation rates, and increased workforce participation. A study published by the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy found that right-to-work states tend to attract more businesses and investment due to their worker-friendly policies. In New Hampshire, where economic competitiveness is essential to our prosperity, adopting such legislation would make our state even more appealing to job creators and entrepreneurs.

At the same time, we should consider the financial impact of withholding compulsory union dues from workers’ paychecks. The National Institute for Labor Relations Research found that, on average, workers in states without right-to-work protections pay hundreds of dollars annually in union dues, regardless of whether they wish to support the union’s activities. Effectively, this is a tax imposed by a non-governmental organization. These fees may pose an undue hardship on families and individuals who would prefer to spend their hard-earned money on their own priorities. Giving workers the right to make their own financial choices would ensure that their money is spent in a way that aligns with their personal beliefs and needs.

Critics of HB 238 argue that banning compulsory dues will undermine unions, yet this argument assumes that unions simply cannot survive without the power of government-sanctioned coercion. In reality, unions that provide genuine value to their members will continue to attract voluntary participation and financial support. That’s exactly what happens in states that have enacted legislation to protect worker freedom. Unions that exist in right-to-work states continue to thrive by adapting in ways that more effectively serve their members’ interests. Compulsory dues and monopoly control have the opposite effect.

Worker-freedom laws like HB 238 do not prevent workers from joining or financially supporting a union. Rather, they simply ensure that no worker is compelled to fund an organization against their will. This fundamental principle aligns with the strong tradition of freedom and individual rights that New Hampshire has long championed.

My support for this bill does not diminish my respect for the role of unions. I appreciate the vital contributions they make to the lives of hard-working families in our state. Unions have accomplished great things for their members, advocating for better wages, working conditions, and benefits. But workers’ freedom of choice must remain a priority. Workers should be allowed to make their own financial decisions with no external interference. They should have complete autonomy to decide their financial commitments, without prejudicial persuasion."

Read more in the Union Leader:
Rep. Steven Kesselring: Right-to-work will make NH stronger and union's more accountable