Lawmakers in Missouri may have passed legislation to become a Right to Work State, but the battle isn't over.
With help from National Right to Work Foundation attorneys, three Missouri workers have filed a legal challenge against a AFL-CIO proposed petition that could repeal the state's impending right-to-work law that makes paying dues as fees as a condition of employment voluntary. The plaintiffs, all of whom are opposed to mandatory union payments, have each experienced forced unionism abuses in the past - and could be again without the protection of a Missouri RTW law. Their lawsuit challenges what they call the "deceptive" ballot language proposed to overturn the law.
"This new lawsuit is based on the actions of the AFL-CIO putting what's known as a 'veto referendum' on the ballot in 2018," explains Mark Mix of the National Right to Work Committee (NRTWC).
The right-to-work law is scheduled to take effect August 28, but Missouri AFL-CIO and other groups want to stop it and have voters decide the issue in November 2018.
"The folks in Missouri have been voting on right-to-work over the last several cycles and [have] proven again and again that they support legislators who support right-to-work," Mix tells OneNewsNow. "In fact, the governor's race [last fall] was kind of a campaign about right-to-work, as Governor Eric Greitens (R-MO) was going to sign a right-to-work bill if elected."
This isn't the first legal challenge National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have filed for workers who back Missouri's right-to-work law. Before the right-to-work bill was signed into law on February 6, the Missouri AFL-CIO president also submitted ten state constitutional amendments to kill the law and give forced unionism state constitutional protection.
"The workers in Missouri, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed and won a lawsuit changing the constitutional amendments that were certified by the previous secretary of state who had received literally millions of dollars from organized labor in his campaign for political office," says Mix. "The judge looked at the ambiguous nature of the constitutional amendments that were certified prior to him leaving office in January and basically clarified those and put together a constitutional amendment that's very clear about what the people of Missouri would be doing."
Editor's note: After story originally posted, plaintiffs' association with lawsuit was clarified.