<strong>“U.S. Worker Choice Laws and Implications for British Columbia and Ontario” reinforces the scholarly literature: worker-choice laws in the U.S. on average increase economic growth by about 1.8% and employment by about 1% in the states that have such policies</strong>
Since becoming B.C.’s premier back in 2011, Christy Clark rightly focused her attention on jobs. Unfortunately to date, we have not seen bold policy moves to truly make our province a job-creation machine.
With labour and business investment becoming more mobile, Premier Clark needs to ensure that B.C. maintains the most investment-friendly jurisdiction in Canada and indeed beyond our borders. Competitive taxes, reasonable regulation, balanced labour laws and good infrastructure are all critical aspects of a positive and competitive investment climate.
While several policies have gone in the opposite direction (e.g., increased corporate and personal income taxes), Premier Clark has the opportunity to provide B.C. with a marked advantage over other jurisdictions (both Canadian provinces and bordering U.S. states) in the race for talent, skilled workers and investment. The advantage comes through the adoption of worker-choice laws.
Worker choice laws (called right-to-work laws in the U.S.) allow workers to choose whether they want to join and financially support a union.
In the U.S., federal legislation prohibits workers from being forced to join a union and allows workers to opt out of union dues that are not related to representation. That is, if unions want to pursue social or political goals unrelated to the representation of workers in collective bargaining, workers are permitted to have their union dues reduced proportionately if they do not want their dues supporting such activities.
Twenty-four U.S. states expanded on federal legislation to allow workers to fully opt out of union dues through worker-choice laws.
In British Columbia, as in all Canadian jurisdictions, mandatory union membership is permitted in collective agreements and can be included as a condition of employment. Further, all workers covered by a collective agreement are required to pay full union dues.
The combination of allowing mandatory membership conditions and the remittance of full union dues results in a strong union bias. In addition, these union-security provisions make unions less responsive to employee demands because members and dues are guaranteed and they inhibit competition for the right to represent workers.
The conclusion of most scholarly research on worker-choice laws finds that they increase economic growth and employment.
Our recent study, “U.S. Worker Choice Laws and Implications for British Columbia and Ontario,” reinforces the scholarly literature: worker-choice laws in the U.S. on average increase economic growth by about 1.8% and employment by about 1% in the states that have such policies. If these general findings on worker-choice laws hold for B.C., total economic output in B.C. would increase by nearly $4 billion a year (about $844 per person) and employment would increase by 19,000.
The benefits of worker-choice laws come primarily through reductions in unionization.
Perhaps not surprisingly, when workers are given a choice with respect to union membership and dues payment, they choose unions less often. In 2012, for instance, British Columbia maintained a private sector union rate of 18.1% compared with union rates of 3.9% in U.S. states with worker-choice laws.
Many of B.C.’s most important industries, including forestry, fishing, mining, oil and gas, construction and manufacturing, would gain a significant advantage over similar industries in other provinces and bordering U.S. states (Idaho is the only northwestern state with worker-choice laws).
The predicted effects of implementing a worker-choice law in B.C. are not trivial. If Premier Clark truly wants the province to become a job creation machine, it seems obvious worker-choice laws should be high on the priority list •
