Key Takeaways

  • Right to work laws allow employees to choose whether to join or financially support a union as a condition of employment.
  • These laws prohibit employers and unions from requiring union membership or dues payments for job eligibility.
  • Currently, 27 states have right to work laws in effect, each with variations in enforcement and coverage.
  • Economic studies show mixed outcomes: some right to work states experience higher job growth and lower unemployment, while others report lower average wages.
  • Workers in right to work states report slightly higher financial well-being and employment stability than those in non-right to work states.
  • The laws are often politically divisive, with supporters emphasizing individual freedom and opponents citing weakened labor unions.
  • Employees in non-right to work states retain certain protections under federal law, even if compelled to pay limited “agency fees.”

What do Right to Work Laws Prohibit

What do right to work laws prohibit? First, it would help to determine what “right-to-work” refers to. The ‘Right-to-Work’ Act of 1947 affirms the right of every U.S. workers to work for a living without compulsory obligation to join a union. The law provides that employees can receive the benefits of the union contract without paying a share of dues and fees to the union. Although ‘Right-to-Work’ laws have been incorporated into state employment laws, the legislation varies. The rule allows for workers to join a union “at will,” and prohibits employers from forcing compulsory union membership as a term or condition of employment. The act also allows for “union shops;” workplace coordinated groups mandating employees to a union within a specified time-frame on hire as provided for under earlier legislation of the Wagner Act of 1935. Introduction of ‘Right-to-Work’ with the enactment of Taft Hartley in 1947, created exception to the “union shops” rule, enabling individual states to prohibit union shops. 

How Right to Work Laws Function in Practice

Right to work laws prevent employers and unions from entering into agreements that make union membership or the payment of union dues a condition of employment. This means an employee cannot be fired for choosing not to join a union. However, these laws do not stop unions from existing or from negotiating collective bargaining agreements that benefit all workers in a workplace.

In practice, these laws protect employee choice—workers may choose to join a union and pay dues, but they cannot be compelled to do so. Employers must remain neutral; they cannot discriminate against workers for either joining or refusing to join a union. These laws are grounded in the National Labor Relations Act and later reinforced by Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act (1947), which gave states the authority to enact right to work legislation.

'Right-to-Work' Laws

The Taft-Hartley Act amended the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, otherwise known as the Wagner Act, did away with the “closed shop” era in U.S. history. The reform of the earlier legislation was the outcome of employee complaints about union shop rules as a criterion for employment. Taft-Hartley further stipulates that the union be obligated to provide non-members’ with the benefits of union membership, despite their election to refuse membership. Non-member employees subject to wrongful termination, are protected by union obligation to represent the rights of that employee that same as a union member, in filing of complaint. Moreover, non-union members can sue the union for failure to successfully prosecute a case on their behalf.

‘Right-to-Work’ laws cover all workers, regardless of non-union member refusal to pay fees normally associated with membership rights to collective workplace bargaining. The rationale for this universal protection of workers’ rights with the union, is that compulsory unionism in any form–"union," "closed," or "agency" shop–is considered a contradiction of the terms to the Right to Work principle; a fundamental human right.  Compulsory union membership is also contrary to the U.S. concept of individual rights and freedom of association. Finally, it is thought that compulsory unionism promotes large labor organizations toward the exertion of excessive power in the workplace and in the political arena. This latter point brings up the historical convergence of the state with union “labor bosses” in cities where large union affiliations have turned into syndicated organized crime networks with extraordinary power over the ‘Right-to-Work’ and attendant economic and social consequences for workers and their families.

Organized labor proponents suggest that ‘Right-to-Work’ laws support free riders at the expense of participatory governance by fellow workers, and that all workers should be obliged to pay a proportionate share of the costs of the union negotiation of contract benefits for the common good. Contrary to legal opinion, unions also maintain that the laws are the impetus to dissension among workers, weakening the labor movement to their disadvantage politically and economically. These topics were the focus of state consideration in the 1950s, when most states incorporated federal ‘Right-to-Work’ legislation as state law.

'Right-to-Work' Laws Debunked

Opponents of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, argue that a Republican Congress controlled political decision, and ‘Right-to-Work’ laws were designed to curb union power in the labor market. The legislation provides that non-union workers not paying union dues would be subject to “agency fees” to incur full benefits of a union. Taft-Hartley clearly states, and court cases have confirmed, that non-union members can be compelled to pay only that portion of union dues that is attributable to the cost of representing employees in collective bargaining and providing the service that are given to union members.

Does My State Have ‘Right-to-Work’ Laws?

The 28 states having Right-to-Work laws include: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. West Virginia legislation is pending.

List of Right to Work States (2025)

As of 2025, 27 states and Guam have enacted right to work laws. The states include: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Some states, such as Michigan, have recently debated repealing or modifying their right to work status, showing how politically dynamic these laws can be. Meanwhile, Delaware, Illinois, and New Mexico continue to operate under union security agreements permitted by federal law. The right to work map is periodically updated as legislatures introduce or repeal such measures

How Does The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation Vary from The National Right To Work Committee?

The National Right to Work Committee and National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation are separate legal organizations with complementary agendas. Established in 1995, National Right to Work Committee is a national organization dedicated to the public education and elimination of all forms of forced unionism through lobbying in Congress and the state legislatures. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation works exclusively with the courts, assisting employees with civil or human rights claims of abuses by employers, employees, and union member acts of compulsory unionism.

Who is Covered Under 'Right-to-Work' Laws?

‘Right to work’ rules vary by state, and cover employees of private employers. Exempted are most federal employees, and airline and railroad industry workers.

Where Can I Expect to Encounter ‘Right-to-Work’ Laws in the Workplace?

Workers encounter ‘Right-to-Work’ laws when being hired for a job; contacted by a union organizer; organizing a union or negotiating union contract, or; union dues are deducted from a paycheck.

  • When Being Hired for a Job – job candidates are covered under a union contract without paying union dues in ‘Right-to-Work’ law states.
  • When Being Contacted by a Union Organizer –legal right to refuse to join a union or pay membership dues on contact by a union organizer.
  • When Trying to Organize a Union or Negotiate a Union Contract – negotiating union contracts, or organizing a union itself, without paying dues.
  • When Union Dues Are Deducted From a Paycheck – if covered under union contract in a ‘Right-to-Work’ state, dues are not mandatory. If never a union member, an employer and union must re-compensate those missing funds. Former union members have the right to resign membership and payment of dues. Depending on the state and the membership agreement, however, some fees may apply after membership resignation.

Are 'Right to Work' States "Anti-Union"?

While some labor groups and employment rights groups are opposed to ‘Right-to-Work’ laws, workers’ right to elect union membership is valid. Coercion is not a “right” and therefore, compulsory union membership considered to be a violation of constitutional rules, despite concerns about free riders. ‘Right-to-Work’ state legislation is meant to protect the worker from coercion, while mandating “agency fees” in most cases to cover non-member obligation to payment for benefits such as on the job protections and higher wages, without assent to fee agreement as a “member” part of union collective bargaining activities.

What if I’m an Employment/Labor Attorney in a ‘Right-To-Work’ State?

Attorneys specializing in employment law in ‘Right-to-Work’ states may be involved in both, or either private-sector or public-sector worker claims. If filing a claim in a state where there is reciprocity outside of the state jurisdiction of license, it is important to have knowledge of the differences between state rules when representing clients in a nationwide union affiliation matter.

Is Right to Work "Anti-Union"?

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is not "anti-union" or "pro-union” in stance, but focused on the perpetuation of individual freedom to work. The Foundation is committed to the right of all U.S. workers to be entirely free of compulsory union membership.

How Does Compulsory Unionism Affect Government Policy?

Compulsory unionism is illustrated in the U.S. Congressional Tax-and-Spend policies where federally-granted powers enable union officials to collect approximately $4.5 billion in compulsory dues per year. Much of this finance is channeled back to congressional representatives through the unreported campaign activities for control and election of majorities dedicated to increasing taxes, and government spending.

What is "Exclusive Representation"?

"Exclusive representation" is the privilege of unions to represent workers under U.S. federal law; empowering union officials in collective bargaining and representation of all workers in a company’s or other bargaining unit. Where ‘Right-to-Work’ laws do not apply, "compulsory union representation" is possible. States allowing for compulsory union representation, say proponents of ‘Right-to-Work’ legislation, deprive workers of their rights. The right to bargain independently, argue these advocates of ‘Right to Work’ policies, is a fundamental constitutional right. Union officials demanding exclusive representation of all workers in a jurisdiction, may exceed their bargaining rights, forcing employees of certain industries to pay union dues for unwanted representation.

What Rights do Employees in Non-Right-to-Work States Have?

The specific rights of employees not covered by ‘Right-to-Work’ legislation in a few states is still present at the federal level by way of U.S. Supreme Court precedent reinforced by the courts. Employees can choose to become a member in a union, and union members can resign union membership. Non-members are obliged to pay for agent fees for amortized bargaining costs. Non-members may not be obliged to pay any fees not explained by the union. Workers with religious beliefs prohibiting membership and dues payment, have special protections under federal law.

Are There ‘Right-to-Work’ Impacts on a State’s Standard of Living?

The National Right to Work Committee reports that ‘Right-to-Work’ states have a better standard of living than those states not integrating the federal legislation. Families in ‘Right-to-Work’ states, have more after-tax income and cash to spend than do their fellow citizens residing in states not enforcing the same laws. Economic benefits of ‘Right-to-Work’ are clear according to Department of Labor (DOL) statistics, which report stronger growth in the nonagricultural and manufacturing sectors, and lower unemployment rates with less frequent strikes by unions.

Right-to-Work Laws: Myth vs. Fact

Myth: ‘Right-to-work’ laws undermine unions.

Fact: ‘Right-to-work’ laws strengthen union locals, by reinforcing legitimate recruitment efforts and adequate representation, without coercion or forced payment of dues. 

Myth: Non-members cost unions.

Fact: Unions on average, spend little time and resources processing of grievances and negotiating contracts in general, and even less so for non-members. Employers are generally assigned these costs by union stewards, and as result, union locals spend little on worker representation of members, and non-members.

Myth: ‘Right-to-work’ laws provide no economic benefit.

Fact: Companies consider legal rules in selection of locate. Organizing victories generate settlements for unions located in jurisdictions with compulsory dues. To this end, about half of major businesses refuse to locate in those jurisdictions, thus limiting job growth according to economic development specialists.

Myth: ‘Right-to-work’ laws lower wages.

Fact: Workers in ‘right-to-work’ states have the same or higher spending power. However, wages in “right-to-work” states are slightly lower, yet reporting is skewed by lower cost of living and other variables, especially in the Southern states region.

Myth: ‘Right-to-work’ laws divides U.S. workers.

Fact: There is overwhelming support for ‘right-to-work’ law contract. 

Economic and Employment Impacts of Right to Work Laws

Studies reveal complex outcomes in states that have adopted right to work laws. According to the Federal Reserve, workers in right to work states often report higher levels of financial stability and job satisfaction, though average wages may be slightly lower due to regional cost-of-living differences.

Potential Economic Effects:

  • Job Growth: Many right to work states attract new businesses, particularly in manufacturing and logistics, because of perceived labor flexibility.
  • Union Membership: These states generally show lower union density, leading to fewer collective bargaining disputes.
  • Wage Variation: While wages tend to be marginally lower, adjusted purchasing power often remains equal or higher due to lower housing and living costs.
  • Worker Mobility: Right to work laws may increase employment opportunities for transient or part-time workers who prefer non-unionized environments.

Opponents argue that these laws weaken worker solidarity and reduce bargaining power, while proponents claim they encourage investment and job creation. Economic performance indicators, however, vary widely depending on the state and industry.

Federal Protections for Workers in Non-Right to Work States

Even in states without right to work laws, federal law still ensures that employees cannot be forced to join a union against their will. Under National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rules, workers can object to paying union dues that are used for political or non-bargaining activities. They can also petition to decertify a union if they believe it no longer represents their interests.

In some cases, employees may pay a reduced agency fee covering only the cost of representation and collective bargaining services. Religious objectors may direct equivalent payments to charitable organizations instead of unions, as protected by federal civil rights laws. These rights preserve a measure of employee autonomy even in union security states.

Balancing Worker Rights and Union Interests

Right to work laws are often misunderstood as anti-union, but their intent is to promote freedom of association rather than eliminate unions. Unions still exist and operate in right to work states—they simply cannot compel membership or dues payment.

Unions that operate in these states must focus on demonstrating value to members through effective representation, improved benefits, and workplace advocacy. This dynamic can foster healthier, more transparent union relationships built on voluntary participation. The challenge lies in balancing individual choice with collective power, a central debate in U.S. labor policy.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What do right to work laws actually prohibit?

They prohibit agreements between employers and unions that require workers to join or financially support a union as a condition of employment.

2. How many states have right to work laws?

As of 2025, 27 states enforce right to work laws, though the specific provisions and enforcement mechanisms vary by state.

3. Do right to work laws lower wages?

Wages in right to work states are often slightly lower, but when adjusted for cost of living, worker purchasing power can be similar or higher than in union-security states.

4. Can unions still exist in right to work states?

Yes. Unions continue to operate and negotiate on behalf of employees, but they cannot compel workers to join or pay dues.

5. How can I find legal help with right to work disputes?

If you’re facing a workplace issue related to union membership, dues, or labor rights, you can find an experienced employment attorney on UpCounsel to guide you through state and federal labor law protections.

If you have inquiries about what do ‘Right-to-work’ laws prohibit, post your legal need on the UpCounsel marketplace. UpCounsel lawyers represent the top 5 percent attorneys in the United States, graduating from top law schools such as Harvard Law School and Yale Law School. UpCounsel attorneys have an average 14 years of legal experience, and have represented corporate clients like Google and Menlo Ventures.