Right-to-Work Laws, Unionization, and Wage Setting

Fortin, Nicole M.; Lemieux, Thomas; Lloyd, Neil

doi:10.1108/s0147-912120230000050011

Cited by 17 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The inclusion of union status and interactions between RTW and union status means that these estimates are not directly comparable to other findings that estimate an overall effect of RTW laws on wages, ranging from 1% to 3.5% lower earnings (Fortin et al, 2023;Gould & Kimball, 2015;Roberts & Habans, 2015;Shierholz & Gould, 2017).…”

Section: Weekly Earningsmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…RTW laws are associated with lower union membership (Eren & Ozbeklik, 2016; Fortin et al, 2023; Moore & Newman, 1985), however, the mechanism is unclear. There are two potential sources for declines in state‐level union membership: (1) increased free riding by union‐covered workers, or (2) a decline in the number of covered workers within a state.…”

Section: Conceptual Framework and Theorized Impacts Of Right‐to‐work ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dickens& Lang, 1988;Freeman & Medoff, 1984;Lang, 1984) Card et al (2004). attribute falls in unionization with increasing wage inequality, lending further credence to the notion that unions reduce wage premia.7 In this vein,Fortin et al (2023) use RTW laws as an instrumental variable (IV) for unionization rates to estimate the causal effect of unions on wages.IMPACTS OF U.S. RIGHT-TO-WORK LAWS…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The impacts of U.S. right‐to‐work laws on free riding, unionization, and compensation

Bono‐Lunn

2023

Southern Economic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Right‐to‐work (RTW) laws are theorized to precipitate union decline by inducing free riding among union‐covered workers; however, this relationship has not been empirically explored. This paper uses recent policy variation and Current Population Survey (CPS) data to identify the impact of state RTW laws on union status (free riding, membership, and coverage), wages, and benefits among private and public sector workers. Doubly robust difference‐in‐difference estimates suggest RTW laws are associated with substantial increases in free riding, decreases in union membership, and decreases in union coverage. Thus, RTW laws weaken unions through combinations of increased free riding and decreased coverage, though effects vary by state and sector. While RTW laws are not associated with changes in wage differentials, state fixed effects estimates suggest that unions provide some excludable advantages to members in the face of RTW legislation, through higher earnings (union wage premium) and fringe benefits (union benefit premium).

show abstract

Section: Weekly Earningsmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Conceptual Framework and Theorized Impacts Of Right‐to‐work ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impacts of U.S. right‐to‐work laws on free riding, unionization, and compensation

Bono‐Lunn

2023

Southern Economic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Once the revised elements were included, a clear congressional majority voted in favour of the deal, except for a limited number of liberal Democrats in the 116th Congress, and negotiations succeeded. It included an improved labour element, though America's own commitment to labour rights remains suspect, as seen in the increase in "right to work" states" limiting union organisation and activity (Fortin et al, 2022). But these changes were only achieved in a problematic and temporary alliance of Trump loyalists and fair traders in Congress with a retrograde populist movement which opposes climate action and undermines democratic accountability and racial and gender equity.…”

Section: Trump Nativist Populism and Disrupted Tradementioning

confidence: 99%

Populist Backlash and Trade Agreements in North America: The Prospects for Progressive Trade

Finbow

2023

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Populist rejection of the embedded liberal international order is evident in many Western democracies. This is partly attributable to the architects of this system, who over-promised widespread benefits while ignoring warnings from labour and fair-trade advocates about risks to economic security from transnational economic competition. This article contrasts Canadian and American conservative populist positions on free trade. Globalisation and free trade without consideration for fair trade weakened the embedded liberal compromise and undermined the Keynesian welfare state model which sustained it. While regional free trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement have had marginal negative effects, they became convenient scapegoats in a strategy of “othering” adopted by Trump and other populists. Populism arose in part in response to middle- and working-class decline (alongside cultural changes and revitalised nativism), which eroded support for embedded liberalism. The heretofore pro-trade GOP followed Trump to a more protectionist and bilateral model to press for “America first,” tinged by nativist othering towards Mexico and China. This diverged from Canadian right-populist leaders, whose rhetoric generally supports freer trade despite scepticism among some supporters. Asymmetrical circumstances of the US as a global economic hegemon vs. Canada as trade-dependent middle power limits the feasibility of a protectionist, “Canada first” position while particularities of political and electoral systems create more room for nativism in the US. Polling results indicate support for free trade in both nations, with a priority for labour and social protections, which provides the potential for further engagement in progressive trade liberalisation. Hence a significant percentage of the population supports “fair-trade” approaches, not protectionism. However, many conservative politicians eschew fair-trade positions and endorse anti-labour policies. Despite gains such as the labour provisions in the Canada–US–Mexico Agreement, a right-populist alliance with fair-trade advocates and labour unions is unsustainable and would entail compromises like climate denial, anti-immigrant, and anti-equity approaches which hinder the pursuit of progressive multilateral trading regimes.

show abstract

“…First, there is an impressive literature that causally identifies the union wage effect through quasi-experimental research designs, using anything from regression discontinuity designs and propensity score matching techniques (e.g., DiNardo and Lee (2004); Lee and Mas (2012); Frandsen (2021);Sojourner, Frandsen, Town, Grabowski and Chen (2015); Card and De La Rica (2006); Bryson (2002)) to instrumental variable methods based on Right-to-Work laws in the United States and changes in national union due subsidies in Norway (e.g., Fortin, Lemieux and Lloyd (2023); Barth, Bryson and Dale-Olsen (2020b); Dodini, Salvanes and Willén (2022)).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Career Effects of Union Membership

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Right-to-Work Laws, Unionization, and Wage Setting

Abstract: How to cite:Please refer to published version for the most recent bibliographic citation information. If a published version is known of, the repository item page linked to above, will contain details on accessing it.

Cited by 17 publications

References 39 publications

The impacts of U.S. right‐to‐work laws on free riding, unionization, and compensation

The impacts of U.S. right‐to‐work laws on free riding, unionization, and compensation

Populist Backlash and Trade Agreements in North America: The Prospects for Progressive Trade

The Career Effects of Union Membership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About