Bill Overview
Title: Nationwide Right to Unionize Act
Description: This bill provides authorization for labor agreements to require membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment regardless of state law (thus preempting state laws that prohibit such agreements).
Sponsors: Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-30]
Target Audience
Population: Employees worldwide in sectors where unionization is possible
Estimated Size: 160000000
- The bill affects all employees in the U.S. who work for employers that could form labor unions.
- This includes employees in every sector and industry where labor unions typically organize, such as manufacturing, education, healthcare, transportation, and public sector jobs.
- The bill preempts state laws, meaning it has nationwide implications, thus affecting workers across all 50 states.
- Globally, unionization is a characteristic mainly present in countries with significant employer-employee regulations and protections, the impact might be less direct but can influence international labor standards and practices.
Reasoning
- The policy could potentially have widespread implications given its broad target of all employees in the U.S. capable of unionizing. However, the degree of impact will vary significantly across different people based on their current employment situation and views on unionization.
- The budget constraints will limit the immediate implementation reach but are sufficient to begin impacting a significant number of workplaces initially.
- While current union members may see less immediate change, non-union workers in sectors with strong union presence might see significant shifts in bargaining processes.
- Diverse employment scenarios, ranging from those in traditional union sectors like manufacturing to those in tech sectors where unionization is less common, will experience varying levels of impact.
- The perspectives of individuals are envisaged to span from wholeheartedly supporting union rights to viewing them as an irrelevant or contentious imposition.
Simulated Interviews
Automotive Assembler (Detroit, MI)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think strengthening unions is crucial for protecting workers' rights.
- In my industry, unions have historically ensured fair wages and job security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Oil and Gas Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm skeptical about unions – they can be beneficial but also lead to unnecessary conflict.
- This policy might disrupt the balance we've found without them.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- In my field, unions are rare, and I'm unsure about their relevance to my work.
- This policy probably won't impact me directly but could provide rights I hadn't considered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Public School Teacher (Birmingham, AL)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The teachers' union is key to maintaining fair work conditions in our schools.
- I'm hopeful this policy will bolster our negotiating power further.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Construction Worker (Charlotte, NC)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've always worked in non-union environments, and I'm curious if things would change for the better with unions allowed.
- It's uncertain if my employer will change policies at all.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Nurse (New York, NY)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We desperately need more say in our working conditions.
- Hoping the policy better supports health workers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Store Clerk (San Jose, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't really have much understanding or experience of unions yet.
- Hopefully, they would provide some benefits if ever needed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Chef (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We don't have unions where I work, but I've heard good things about their effect on wages and hours elsewhere.
- This act might shake things up for us too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Freelance Graphic Designer (Denver, CO)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a freelancer, I don’t see a connection to this policy.
- Unions are more applicable to employed, not independent workers like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Retired Steelworker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've always valued what unions provided in terms of security and rights.
- Even in retirement, I believe stronger unions can only bring positive changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $220000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $270000000)
Year 3: $242000000 (Low: $187000000, High: $297000000)
Year 5: $290000000 (Low: $230000000, High: $350000000)
Year 10: $400000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $500000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Key Considerations
- State-level laws will be preempted by the federal legislation, creating uniform labor agreement conditions across all states.
- Potential legal challenges could arise, impacting the costs associated with implementing the legislation.
- Economic shifts due to changes in unionization could vary significantly by industry and region.