Ballot Question Asks About Strengthening Right-to-Work Law

At the polls this Nov. 8, Virginians will be asked if they would like to add a Right-to-Work Amendment to the Virginia Constitution or keep it as a state statute.

In Virginia, there is currently a Right-to-Work Statute (40.1-59). It says that an employer cannot require anyone to join a union or similar organization as a condition of employment; non-union members have the right to work even if they do not join a union; and unions should not have a monopoly on any Virginia industry.

The question on the ballot is whether that law should be codified into the Virginia Constitution, which would solidify the law so not to allow the Virginia General Assembly to overturn it, or should it remain as a statute, which the General Assembly would have the power to change.

For a Virginia Constitutional Amendment to be overturned, it would first need to be approved by a majority in the state house and senate. Next, it would need to obtain a majority vote from the people in a ballot initiative in a special or general election.

The ballot question does not specifically state that the statute already exists, which may cause confusion among voters.

The Ballot Questions reads:

Should Article I of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to prohibit any agreement or combination between employer and labor union or labor organization whereby (i) nonmembers of the union or organization are denied the right to work for the employer (ii) membership to the union or organization is made a condition of employment or continuation of employment by such an employer, or (iii) the union or organization acquires an employment monopoly in any such enterprise.

Mark Obenshain (R-29^th) is currently advocating for this amendment because he is concerned that Democratic such as Attorney General Mark Herring (D) and future General Assemblies could choose to not enforce the law.

However, a spokesperson for Herring has said that the Attorney General’s Office has been consistent in enforcing the statute.

Proponents of the amendment also believe the statute is important enough to be included in the Commonwealth’s constitution. Those opposing the amendment say the law is sufficient as it stands.

In this current political climate, Republicans are supporting a “Yes” vote to the amendment; Democrats are supporting a “No” vote. Business groups are also more likely to support the amendment, while labor groups are more likely to oppose it.

Riley O’Casey President of the Prince William Education Association is asking her members to vote “No” on the amendment, saying it is unnecessary and would be “wasting time,” and “wasting taxpayers money.”

“Right-to-work is already law and so it is already put into place, but to put it into the constitution wastes taxpayers money and then there is a less of a chance of changing it,” O’Casey said.

O’Casey laments the way the amendment is being presented, saying, “The way it is described is very, very confusing. People may read it and say, ‘Yes, we do not want people to have to join a union.’”

O'Casey notes the Virginia Education Association also supports a “No” vote on the amendment.

Northern Virginia Labor Association opposes the amendment. The association posted this statement on its website.

Virginia’s Constitution is a sacred document and does not need to be changed. This amendment demonstrates misplaced priorities and Virginia families deserve better. Our representatives should focus on strengthening our communities and creating good jobs. We oppose efforts to change our constitution to include an unfounded attack on working families.

Prince William Chamber of Commerce supports a “Yes” vote on the amendment. The legislative committee of the local business organization believes that while the law is already a statute, it deserves further legal protection.

Spokesman Brendon Shaw, Director of Government Relations for the Prince William Chamber of Commerce sent the following statement:

Tomorrow, in addition to voting for the next President, Virginia will also decide whether or not to amend its constitution to include language protecting the Commonwealth's Right-to-Work laws.

This law simply means that membership in any particular trade union cannot be made a condition of employment. As it stands now, Right-to-Work could be eliminated by judicial fiat.  Elevating Right-to-Work to the Constitution will ensure that a future General Assembly could not reverse this important piece of pro-business policy without first