Summary
We support:
- The right of workers to organize and join unions voluntarily
- State-level “right-to-work” laws that prevent mandatory union membership as a condition of employment
- The use of secret ballots in union certification elections
- A neutral role for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in labor disputes
- Reforms to public sector compensation systems, including transitioning from defined-benefit to defined-contribution pension plans
- Aligning public sector health benefits more closely with those in the private sector
We oppose:
- Federal legislation intended to significantly expand the power of private sector unions
- Policies that weaken the role of secret ballots in unionization decisions
- Efforts to expand the scope and influence of public sector unions
If you have already made up your mind, then scroll to the bottom of the page and take the poll to let us know how you feel. If you need to hear more, please read the background section below.
Curious how your views compare? Early input has a meaningful impact—vote below (scroll down) to see the current results.
Your input helps us refine these policy positions.
Background
Private Sector Unions
Private sector unions have played an important role in the economic development of the United States. Historically, they helped improve working conditions, wages, and job security at a time when regulatory protections were limited.
Over time, many of these functions have been assumed by federal and state regulations, including workplace safety standards, wage laws, and anti-discrimination protections. As a result, the role of private sector unions has evolved, and their membership as a share of the workforce has declined.
At the state level, we support “right-to-work” laws that prohibit requiring workers to join a union as a condition of employment. However, we do not support imposing such policies at the federal level, as doing so could be unnecessarily divisive and may not be required over the long term.
We support maintaining the use of secret ballots in determining whether a workforce will unionize. Secret ballots protect workers from potential coercion and ensure that decisions reflect individual choice.
We also oppose policies that would accelerate union certification elections in ways that limit the ability of employers to communicate with employees about the potential advantages and disadvantages of unionization.
Finally, we believe that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) should maintain a neutral role in labor disputes. Regulatory decisions should not be used to favor either unions or employers, including decisions affecting where firms may locate or expand their operations.
Public Sector Unions
Public sector unions operate under a fundamentally different set of incentives than private sector unions.
In the private sector, unions are constrained by market forces. If labor costs rise too far above competitive levels, firms may lose market share, reduce employment, or cease operations. These dynamics place natural limits on the long-term growth of union compensation.
In contrast, public sector unions negotiate with government entities that have the ability to raise revenue through taxation. This can weaken the feedback mechanisms that typically constrain compensation decisions in the private sector.
In addition, public sector unions often play an active role in the political process, including supporting candidates and policies that influence the terms of their own employment. This creates the potential for conflicts of interest and for compensation and benefit decisions that do not fully reflect long-term fiscal constraints.
We support efforts to address these structural issues. In particular, we support transitioning public sector pension systems from defined-benefit plans to defined-contribution plans. Defined-benefit systems can create long-term financial obligations that are difficult to manage and that shift costs to future taxpayers.
We also support aligning public sector health benefits more closely with those in the private sector. This can help ensure that compensation systems are sustainable and broadly consistent with the economic conditions faced by taxpayers.
Long-Term Fiscal Sustainability
A central concern with public sector compensation is the potential for costs to be deferred into the future.
When compensation is structured through long-term pension or healthcare commitments, the full cost of those commitments may not be immediately visible. This can create incentives for policymakers to agree to terms that appear manageable in the short term but create significant financial obligations over time.
Policies that increase transparency and align compensation more closely with current economic conditions can help reduce these risks and improve long-term fiscal stability.
Go to the Table of Contents or to the Next Policy Position
Ready to weigh in? At this stage, each vote has a meaningful impact—see the current results after voting.
Your input helps us refine these policy positions.