What effect does this have on bills that repeal right to work and force people to pay into unions?
For example, our rights grant us the ability to arm ourselves and practice our religion, but we also have the right to not arm ourselves and cannot be forced to practice a religion. Using that logic, would it make it illegal to require union membership as a condition of employment? Just as our rights allow us to not arm ourselves or allow us to practice no religion, it would make sense that under this we should be allowed to not unionize if that is what an individual wants. Making any laws that allow requirements of union membership unconstitutional if this should pass.
Since this amendment explicitly says that right of the working people to organize and bargain collectively shall not be infringed, it would likely imply that right-to-work laws are no longer valid, as they infringe upon the right to organize and bargain collectively.
No matter how much you say that people are forced to pay into unions, this just rings hollow.
And while i hate to reiterate what i have said in the past, in this case it is necessary to do so:
Nobody is being forced to join a union. Sure at some workplaces, where a union has been designated by the employees to bargain collectively on their behalf, you must either be part of the union, or allow them to bargain for you in many areas. If you object, seek employment elsewhere: it's part of the terms of working there.
Imagine that it's like having to report to a manager or supervisor you dislike, or comply with work rules you find objectionable: you're not 'forced', but if you want to work there, that's what you're going to have to deal with.
