Legislative Analysis
Phone: (517) 373-8080
REPEAL PRIVATE SECTOR RIGHT-TO-WORK LAW http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa
Senate Bill 34 as enrolled Analysis available at
Sponsor: Sen. Darrin Camilleri http://www.legislature.mi.gov
House Committee: Labor
Senate Committee: Labor
Complete to 3-22-23
(Enacted as Public Act 8 of 2023)
SUMMARY:
Senate Bill 34 would amend 1939 PA 176, the labor mediation act, to remove provisions
added in 2012 commonly known as the “Right to Work” legislation pertaining to private
sector employees. Right-to-work laws generally provide that an employee cannot be legally
compelled to pay dues to a union in order to be covered under their workplace’s collective
bargaining agreement.
Currently, the act prohibits an individual from being required to do any of the following
to obtain or continue employment:
• Refrain from or resign from membership in, affiliation with, or financial support of
a labor organization.
• Become or remain a member of a labor organization.
• Pay any dues, fees, or other charges to a labor organization.
• Pay a charitable organization or another third party an amount of money equivalent
to dues, fees, or other charges that are required to be represented by a labor
organization.
Violations are punishable by a civil fine of up to $500, and individuals harmed by a real or
threatened violation can bring a civil action for damages or injunctive relief, or both.
Additionally, employees and other persons 1 cannot use force, intimidation, or threats to
compel a person to do any of the following, punishable by a civil fine of up to $500:
• Become or remain a member of a labor organization.
• Affiliate with or financially support a labor organization.
• Refrain from engaging in employment, joining a labor organization, affiliating with
a labor organization, or financially supporting a labor organization.
• Pay a charitable organization or another third party an amount of money equivalent
to dues, fees, or other charges that are required to be represented by a labor
organization.
The bill would remove the first set of provisions described above (pertaining to prohibited
requirements for obtaining or continuing employment), as well as language declaring that
it is in the best interest of the people of Michigan to protect the right to work.
1
The act defines person as including an individual, partnership, association, corporation, business trust, labor
organization, or any other private entity.
House Fiscal Agency Page 1 of 3
 The bill would amend the second set of provisions to prohibit employees and other persons
from using force, intimidation, or threats to compel a person to do the following:
• Become or remain a member of a labor organization.
• Affiliate with or financially support a labor organization.
• Refrain from joining a labor organization, affiliating with a labor organization, or
financially supporting a labor organization.
This list would no longer include refraining from engaging in employment or making a
payment to a charitable organization or other third party, and the $500 maximum fine
would be removed. However, the bill would not provide any other penalties or sanctions
for violating the above prohibitions.
The bill would add a new provision stating that an employer and a labor organization may
enter into a collective bargaining agreement that requires all employees represented by the
labor organization to share fairly in the organization’s financial support. Neither the labor
mediation act nor any local laws or policies could prohibit or limit any agreement that
requires employees to pay dues or service fees to the labor organization as a condition of
employment.
The bill would appropriate $1.0 million to the Department of Labor and Economic
Opportunity (LEO) for the 2022-23 fiscal year to do all of the following:
• Respond to public inquiries regarding the changes made to the labor mediation act
by the bill.
• Provide the LEO Employment Relations Commission with sufficient staff and other
resources for implementation of the bill.
• Inform public employers, public employees, and bargaining representatives about
changes to their rights and responsibilities.
• Any other purpose that the director of LEO determines is necessary for
implementation of the bill.
(This appropriation would have the effect of making the bill immune from referendum
under section 9 of Article II of the state constitution.)
Finally, the definition of “employer” would be amended to no longer exclude entities
subject to 1947 PA 336, the public employment relations act (PERA).
MCL 423.1 et seq
BACKGROUND AND BRIEF DISCUSSION:
In 2012, Michigan became the twenty-fourth state to enact right-to-work legislation with
the passage of 2012 PA 348 and 2012 PA 349, which prohibited mandatory union fees for
private and public employees, respectively. Senate Bill 0034 would reverse the changes
made to the labor mediation act by 2012 PA 348.
House Fiscal Agency SB 34 as enrolled Page 2 of 3
 Opponents of right-to-work laws argue that the laws create a free-rider problem and the
resulting financial impact on unions has reduced their ability to provide services, while
supporters of right-to-work laws argue that they foster economic growth and job creation
while allowing employees to opt out of supporting unions that do not align with their
interests.
Twenty-seven states and Guam have adopted right-to-work laws, the most recent being
Kentucky in 2017. 2
FISCAL IMPACT:
Senate Bill 34 would have an indeterminate fiscal impact on the state and on local units of
government. Violations that currently result in civil fines would result in misdemeanor
convictions under the bill. The number of misdemeanor convictions that would result is
not known. New misdemeanor convictions would increase costs related to county jails
and/or local misdemeanor probation supervision. Costs of local incarceration in county
jails and local misdemeanor probation supervision, and how those costs are financed, vary
by jurisdiction. The fiscal impact on local court systems would depend on how provisions
of the bill affected court caseloads and related administrative costs. It is difficult to project
the actual fiscal impact to courts due to variables such as law enforcement practices,
prosecutorial practices, judicial discretion, case types, and complexity of cases. Any
increase in penal fine revenue would increase funding for public and county law libraries,
which are the constitutionally designated recipients of those revenues.
It is not possible to quantify what other fiscal impact, if any, the main provisions of the bill
would have on state and local government.
The bill would appropriate $1.0 million to the Department of Labor and Economic
Opportunity in FY 2023-24 for certain administrative responsibilities.
Legislative Analyst: Holly Kuhn
Fiscal Analysts: Ben Gielczyk
Robin Risko
■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their
deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.
2
https://ballotpedia.org/Right-to-work_laws.
House Fiscal Agency SB 34 as enrolled Page 3 of 3


Statutes affected:
Substitute (S-1): 423.1
Senate Introduced Bill: 423.1
As Passed by the Senate: 423.1
As Passed by the House: 423.1
Senate Concurred Bill: 423.1
Public Act: 423.1
Senate Enrolled Bill: 423.1