Congress can empower workers through choice — not coercion

The government shutdown drowned out a critical discussion in Congress — how to keep the economy open and thriving for American workers.

During Washington’s month-and-a-half closure, the U.S. Senate still spent significant time introducing and debating reforms to the country’s woefully outdated labor laws. Workers and their families need to know that lawmakers are facing a monumental decision — a decision between empowering workers through choice or stifling them through governmental barriers and coercion.

The stakes couldn’t be higher, and lawmakers know it. The Senate has heavily focused on labor law since the start of October — with two high-profile hearings and a new pro-worker legislative package — because both Republicans and Democrats recognize that the workforce has dramatically changed since the labor laws of the 1930s. But 90 years ago, a third of workers were in manufacturing. Now it’s just 8 percent. A fifth of workers were employed in agriculture. Now it’s barely 1 percent. Yet the labor laws of nearly a century ago are still in place, oriented towards an economy that no longer exists.

The workforce isn’t the only thing that’s changed. The skills that workers themselves need are quickly shifting in the face of automation and competition. There’s also a greater need for flexibility in a fast-paced economy, so that workers can make the most of new opportunities and technologies as they arise. These real-world challenges are the backdrop for Congress’ sudden emphasis on labor reform.

But not all reforms are created equal, as I show in a comprehensive new study of the biggest ideas under debate in Congress. Some lawmakers — on both the left and the right — are responding to these dramatic shifts by doubling down on the one-size-fits-all labor model of the 20th century. The way they see it, union leaders should be given more control over workers, and government should have more top-down power to impose its will on employers and employees alike. These politicians think this approach will boost manufacturing. But manufacturing is actually up 10 percent in states that let workers opt out of supporting a union.

This is the animating philosophy of Democrats’ PRO Act and Sen. Josh Hawley’s framework for a kind of “PRO Act lite.” They’d both make it harder for workers to make informed choices about unionization and let the federal government impose union contracts on workers without their consent, via arbitration panels. The Democrats would go even further by forcing workers to pay unions against their will, undermining the secret ballot in unionization elections, and destroying self-employment pathways including independent contracting. Such pathways are especially important for people like working mothers and budding entrepreneurs.

In short, these ideas would leave workers with less of the freedom and flexibility they need in the 21st century economy. Thankfully, others in Congress are pushing for reforms that would give workers more choices — not less.

A case in point is the legislative package that Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) introduced on Nov. 10, joined by others including Sens. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C). They’d protect workers’ paychecks by requiring unions to get approval before spending dues money on politics. They’d also protect workers’ privacy by letting them choose what contact information unions get during the organizing process. And they’d protect workplace democracy by requiring that at least two-thirds of workers participate in union elections — preventing a minority of people from determining the fate of every employee.

Another praiseworthy reform is the Employee Rights Act, which Scott introduced in the shutdown’s early days after Rep. Rick Allen (R-Ga.) previously introduced it in the House. Among its many good ideas, the Employee Rights Act guarantees the secret ballot and protects workers from intimidation and harassment. It also gives unionized workers in the 26 right-to-work states the freedom to negotiate their own contract with their employer, so they can better address their individual needs. And the Employee Rights Act guarantees that self-employed workers have maximum flexibility to design their jobs to fit their lives.

These are just a few of the commonsense ideas that the Senate discussed amid the shutdown. Cassidy has also introduced a bill to give 27 million independent workers voluntary, portable health care and retirement benefits. Other lawmakers are pushing to give workers more scheduling flexibility by letting them swap overtime pay for paid leave. Bottom line: Senators and representatives have no shortage of ideas that would help workers get ahead and stay ahead in the modern economy.

Americans need a pro-worker agenda for the 21st century. It’s time to empower workers to chase opportunity, not ask permission from unions or government. That’s the decision facing Congress: Whether to give workers more choices, or give union leaders and federal bureaucrats more control. Now that the government shutdown is finally over, this debate can finally get the attention it deserves. And hopefully, workers will soon get the freedom and flexibility they deserve.

Austen Bannan is a senior fellow at the Institute for the American Worker and employment fellow at Americans for Prosperity.