Kentucky Needs a PRO Act
Dalton Nolan
5/15/2024
On Thursday, May 9, after extensive pressure and organizing by rank-and-file workers and grassroots community organizations, the Vermont Senate and House of Representatives passed S.102, the Vermont PRO Act (the “Protecting the Right to Organize Act”). The Vermont PRO Act represents a major episode in the labor movement as it stands as a direct challenge to the legacy spawned by Taft-Hartley. The Vermont PRO Act, among other things, targets two of the most harmful pieces of legislation tied to the Taft-Hartley legacy: “At Will” and “Right to Work” legislation.
“At Will” laws allow for either the employer or the worker to terminate the latter’s employment at a company without reason. In theory, this law “empowers” the worker the freedom of choice to leave and find employment elsewhere; however, in practice, “At Will” laws empower the employer, who, despite being barred from firing people due to protected status (e.g., gender, race, disability, etc.), don’t have to give a reason for terminating a worker. In this, the employer has the power to effectively fire without probable cause, leading to widespread abuse.
“Right To Work” laws are even more harmful, with them bringing an end to closed shops—unionized businesses that required any worker to be a union member in order to work there—and replaced them with the “Right to Work” concept, in which a unionized workplace can’t require union membership as a prerequisite for employment, but these non-union workers are still represented by the union in collective bargaining agreements. These “Right to Work” laws effectively create a double system of employment in which the union is divided between union members required to pay dues and participate in the union and non-union members who don’t have to do any of that and who still receive the benefits as if they were union members.
Some may be confused as to why “Right to Work” laws are harmful: isn’t the freedom to work in any workplace we want without being forced into a union a good thing? No, it isn’t. Since unions fight for the workers within a workplace (or industry), having closed shops protect the union—by maintaining strength and solidarity at a workplace—and workers—by giving them a powerful tool and resource that protects them and workers for their interests. By passing “Right To Work” laws, governments eliminate closed shops, weakening the position of a union in a workplace by creating a section of workers who are getting a “free ride” by receiving all the benefits of being in a union without actually being a union member, paying dues, or participating in the democratic, collective process of being unionized. Consequently, good union members are justifiably resentful of their fellow workers who take advantage of this unjust system designed to hinder the union’s power and unity. In this, “Right to Work” laws are a weapon used against unions and, by extension, working class solidarity and power.
Kentucky is both an “At Will” and “Right to Work” state, making it one of the most anti-union states in the country. In contrast, Vermont is not a “Right to Work” state, with the Vermont PRO Act only underscoring that. On the topic of “At Will” legislation, the Vermont PRO Act sets clear criteria that results in “Good-Cause Termination” (i.e., probable cause firing) that targets unfair or arbitrary firings by employers, with a process being established that employers must follow to demonstrate they are following these criteria. In addition, the PRO Act extends the right to organize to agricultural and domestic workers and bans captive audience meetings—closed-door meetings in which management, in a myriad of ways, tries to dissuade workers from voting for a union.
As mentioned before, the Vermont PRO Act received widespread support from the general public, with unions and, more importantly, the rank-and-file, being particularly vocal in their support of the act. With such fervent support and pressure from the Vermont people, the PRO Act survived to pass both chambers of the Vermont legislature and is now awaiting Republican Governor Phil Scott’s signature or veto; however, with such overwhelming support inside and outside the legislature, it is likely Governor Scott will sign the bill into law, making Vermont ahead of the federal government, which has yet to pass a national PRO Act, despite it being first proposed back in 2019.
With the Vermont PRO Act emanating a pro-labor character, especially when we recognize the immeasurable pressure the Vermont working class placed on the state legislature to pass the bill, Vermont is setting the bar for what should be the bare minimum across the country. Though the federal government does mandate certain policies through the National Labor Relations Board and the Taft-Hartley Act, these laws mostly give power to the states to determine their own labor laws, resulting in a confusing mess of labor jurisprudence and procedures that leave people in one state with radically different labor regulations compared to neighboring states. As such, the fight for the improvement of workers’ material conditions begins at the local and state levels, necessitating working people to fight tooth and nail and pressure reluctant legislatures to pass state-level PRO Acts in a manner similar to Vermont.
The passage of the Vermont PRO Act in both chambers of its legislature and the recent victory of the Volkswagen workers in Chattanooga, Tennessee in their union election, demonstrates one thing: rank-and-file organizing works. Through tireless organizing and solidarity, the working people of any locality, of any state, including those in the South—Kentucky included—can unite into a cohesive, resilient organism that can fight for the empowerment and liberation of the working class.