Inside Higher Ed had a story that I found doubly appealing. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals overruled an NLRB decision in favor of allowing faculty unionization at a private university. I am in favor of any decision that limits the reach of the NLRB, because the scheme for unionization under federal law is so horrendous — if a majority votes in favor of a union, then the union becomes the exclusive bargaining representative of all the workers indefinitely. No individual should be compelled to accept another person (or group) as his representative against his will. The effect of the D.C. Circuit’s decision is therefore to protect the sizable minority of faculty members who did not want to have unionization thrust upon them.

What about the majority? Those professors are still free to join the a union and ask that it represent them. Without the coercion of the National Labor Relations Act, however, the union wouldn’t be certified and would not be able to compel the administration to enter into collective bargaining. And that’s exactly the way things should be. The owners of a business or administrators of a college should have the right to say, “No, we choose not to bargain with you” to union representatives, just as they can say that to any other private party that seeks to contract with them.

Toward the end of the IHE piece, the general counsel for the American Federation of Teachers laments the decision, saying it shows “just why we need better labor law in this country.” Yes, but what he no doubt has in mind is law that is even more authoritarian. What I’d like to see is labor law that respects the freedom to say “no.” All you need for that is the common law.

The other thing about the decision that appeals to me is that it involves my alma mater, Carroll College (now called university). The last thing a small, financially struggling institution needs is the fingers of mandatory collective bargaining around its neck.