Is Right To Work Really Free Market?

JD Tuccille of Reason.com has made the unusual argument that Right To Work is actually against the working of the free-market economy (which is what we discuss here).

Right To Work legislation (from the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act) forbids union membership as a condition for employment. In other words you don't have to be a member of the company's union or pay dues to get a job.

Right To Work supporters argue that closed shops (places where you have to be a union member to work at) are bad for the free market economy because they prevent an employer from being able to hire who he wants and an individual to accept employment where they want. They say that this is part of the right to private property, a key part of the market economy in which you keep what you earn. The argument is that unions prevent the usage of private property and limit competitive hiring and pay tactics to better serve consumers.

Tuccille writes that Right To Work actually denies the property rights of the owner by saying that an employer cannot create a closed shop by voluntary contract with a union. So, Right To Work would mean an employee could undermine the employer's desire to have them part of a union.

He also does note that even without Right To Work, it is still not a free market of labor. Labor Unions still get monopolistic protections from the National Labor Relations Board. His prescriptions is to get rid of the NLRB all together and not bother with Right To Work which he believes is hypocritical.

The End of Loser Liberalism by Dean Baker makes the same argument. He makes the case that Right to Work is anti free market as part of his accusation that Conservatives are not truly free market.