Some on the right view unions as a bulwark against ‘woke capital,’ but labor is even more compromised. Employee freedom is the answer.
Some on the right view unions as a bulwark against ‘woke capital,’ but labor is even more compromised. Employee freedom is the answer.
W ith the rise of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) activist investing and the increasing liberal tilt of the commanding heights of major corporations, many conservatives have begun rethinking their and the Republican Party’s relationship to big business. A handful, most prominently U.S. senators Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Josh Hawley (Mo.), have even proposed taking the side of labor unions, long a pillar of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, in response to “woke capitalism” and changes in political coalitions. That would be a mistake.
Labor unions use their power over the workplace to impose ideological conformity, fund full-spectrum socially liberal movements, and deny small entrepreneurs their first step on the ladder of ownership of the means of production — which deprives social conservatives of important coalition allies.
That labor unions are an institutional pillar of the organized Left and major donors to the Democratic Party is well established. But the problems with a supposedly right-leaning pro-labor-union approach go deeper than that. Giving unions additional authority or leverage in negotiations, as senators Rubio and Hawley have variously proposed, does not balance workplace and civic power between social-conservative workers and woke corporations.
Instead, it further unbalances power and places additional money and authority in left-wing hands, which is why a properly conservative approach to labor would continue to focus on guaranteeing workers’ individual rights rather than supposed collective solidarity. (In practice, “collective solidarity” in worker organizing is a simple elective dictatorship of 50 percent plus one.) The Employee Rights Act (ERA) framework proposed by Senator Tim Scott (R., S.C.) in the previous Congress contains multiple provisions that would empower socially conservative workers to live and work according to their own lights, not those of labor unions that have celebrated “International Pronouns Day.”
The most direct protection would apply to workers currently represented by labor unions. The ERA would require unions to seek affirmative consent from each worker before using his or her dues or fee payments for purposes other than collective bargaining — most notably, support for political causes. Unions use their treasuries funded by members’ dues to fund advocacy groups, activist coalitions, and think tanks.
Those recipients often do far more than support socialist economic policies such as higher minimum wages and government mandates for various forms of paid leave. In its most recent annual report, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) disclosed that it funded numerous controversial groups involved in left-wing and radical-left racial, environmental, and corporate policies. Race Forward, recipient of $25,000, campaigns for left-wing identity politics. The Women’s March, the controversial feminist campaign for left-wing racial, gender, and other identity politics, received $110,000 from the union. FWD.us, a Big Tech–backed lobbying group for liberalized immigration, received $27,275.
Those only scratch the surface of SEIU’s support for left-wing social policy. Major left-wing multi-issue advocacy groups and think tanks such as the Center for American Progress Action Fund, State Innovation Exchange, and Ballot Initiative Strategy Center have received six-figure sums from the union. And this is only one union — even if it is a large, politically motivated one deeply involved in the Democracy Alliance of left-wing donors. The American labor movement in general is right there with the SEIU, with exceptions such as the National Border Patrol Council so rare that they are notable.
Other Employee Rights Act protections for independent workers and franchise owners also would benefit social conservatives. The ERA would codify the long-standing common-law determination of “independent contractor,” which would preserve flexible working arrangements enjoyed by many freelance workers who stay home to care for children or homeschool. Also targeted by the SEIU and protected by the ERA is the franchise-business model, which gives many aspiring entrepreneurs their first opportunity to own their own businesses and to join the petite bourgeoisie. While big business might be cutting deals with the woke mob, the petite bourgeoisie of small entrepreneurs remains staunchly full-spectrum conservative. According to OpenSecrets, 98.22 percent of the contributions from the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a trade group for small and medium-sized businesses, and the reportable contributions from individual staff members went to Republican candidates and party committees in 2022.
The final warning to social conservatives who would empower labor organizers should be the simplest. Contemporary organized labor uses its position to enforce ideological conformity inside and outside the workplace. Unlike the would-be robber barons in increasingly woke capital who self-interestedly seek to protect their elite status against a powerful Left that might otherwise turn on them, the professional-managerial “folx” who run organized labor enforce conformity to satisfy their own consciences. (Their status, power, and six-figure salaries are merely perks.) Giving them more power — whether through easily captured “works councils” and corporate-board seats as Senator Rubio proposed in the last Congress, or by placing powerful fingers on the scale for Big Labor as Senator Hawley proposed during the potential rail strike in 2022 — would be a massive strategic blunder.