We got no massa down here. Long gone. Other RTW states, plenty from the North:

The following 22 states are right-to-work states:

Alabama
Arizona - (established by state's Constitution, not by statute)
Arkansas - (established by state's Constitution, not by statute)
Florida - (established by state's Constitution, not by statute)
Georgia
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Nebraska
Nevada
North Carolina
North Dakota
Oklahoma - (established by state's Constitution, not by statute)
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Wyoming
The territory of Guam also has right-to-work laws.

Right to work states don't mean the workers can't form a union. It means if the majority of the employees choose to do so, an individual can opt out of membership and paying dues.
The people that choose to opt out, still receive the union won benefits, and in most cases the union's protection from unfair labor practices.

Yea, and people don't have to put up with the strong arm tactics of unions controlling their money and job sites.

No, they could go back to Henry Ford's strong arm goons... and unsafe working condition that killed thousands every year.

Being a right-to-work state also means they can fire you for any reason or no reason, as long as it isn't blatantly discriminatory. This is quite useful for firing people who just suck at their jobs, but aren't necessarily grossly negligent.

Certainly a double edged sword. One I can live with. We have a Union at our place of work. They do a good job of protecting the workers.

It's also handy for getting rid of people they would like to replace, with people that will work for less. Or to make room for a lodge buddy's nephew. Or to dump that chick before she gets pregnant. Or replace that guy that lost an arm in the unguarded machinery, with a two armed guy that can mow the bosses lawn, on his own time, in order to keep his job.

That's what the Stupid Left would want you to believe, Bruce, yes. "Massa," quotha.

I generally frustrate the Stupid Left, of course. It's the good thing to do.

Business is business.

And it doesn't care about treating people fairly or ethically, so they have to demand it. Both employees and customers.

Again, Bruce -- that is what the Stupid Left wants you to believe. Can you stop being their tool? I can and have. You succeed better in business by caring about treating people ethically and fairly. No less do I.

Horseshit, I've seen it too many times. I've even been on the receiving end myself. Businesses treat their employees no better than the current prevailing working conditions in the area, as determined by middle management. The welfare of the peons is a low priority on the spreadsheets.

I've been on both sides of this issue. Union state/right to work state, Union/management. I grew up in a UAW town and remember guys getting beat with bats for trying to cross the line during a strike. Each and every option has pros and cons for employer AND employee.

In my old life as union guy and back up steward I know the wonders of the Union. Thanks for the weekend thing, the better pay, benefits, etc. I also know the shitty side - completely worthless employee gets to keep job because of union protection. Single mother willing to work 2nd shift job to help company and her family, but unable to because of seniority issue.

As a manager I had to play by the rules too. Keeping said shitty employee even though EVERYONE knew we were better off without him. Unable to fire employee for 8 freaking months until case was airtight and unassailable by union or lawyers. But it was nice not having to worry about job assignments since the Union had the bid process spelled out in detail. It usually worked out well.

Unions were absolutely vital in bringing about change in the workplace. They are vital in keeping the i's dotted and t's crossed. They are also culpable in the downfall of the US auto industry among others. The excesses of the '70's and '80's still are not fully realized. They are guilty of being too shortsighted as they are political machines with leadership mainly concerned with keeping their leadership. They sell future workers out for the sake of short term gains.

As with all things there are two sides to every story and they are both valid.

My Dad was on the contractors side of the table, negotiating with the plumbers Union, although he was a dues paying, non-voting, member of that union.
He complained the contractors always gave in too easily, because they figured they were all paying the same rate, and the profits were usually figured as a percentage of the total cost of doing the job. The higher the cost, the higher the profit.

The Automobile companies, pre-foreign competition, were probably the same way. Then when they had to compete, they told the unions, we'll give you a little money now, but we'll take care of you when you retire, which the unions accepted. Remember, the highest paid autoworkers are in Europe, plus they get socialized health care.

But instead of funding the promises, and making capital improvements for better efficiency, the car makers blew their profits on bloated middle management, golden parachutes and phony spreadsheets for wall street.
Now they are telling the unions, uh, so sorry, we can't keep the promises those rich retired guys made.

Like I said before