Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg (left), Gov. Glenn Youngkin (center) and Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears during a news conference in support of an amendment enshrining “right-to-work” laws in the state constitution in Richmond on Jan. 21, 2025. (Photo by Charlotte Rene Woods)
A push to enshrine Virginia’s “right-to-work” laws in the state constitution was blocked Tuesday by the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee, which voted 8-7 along party lines to defeat the proposed amendment.
Senate Joint Resolution 271, introduced by Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg, aimed to make it unlawful to deny employment based on union membership or refusal to join a union. The defeat delivers another blow to “right-to-work” advocates, whose similar effort was rejected by Virginia voters in 2016.
“Workers can choose to join a union and many of them will, or they can choose not to join a union,” Obenshain told the committee Tuesday. “And if they choose to join a union, they can’t be fired for making that choice. If they choose not to join a union, they can’t be fired for not joining a union.”
“Right-to-work” laws are currently in place through state statute. Supporters of Obenshain’s amendment have argued that embedding these protections in the state constitution would make it harder for future legislatures to weaken or repeal them.
If the measure had passed, it would have required approval in two consecutive General Assembly sessions and ratification by Virginia voters in a statewide referendum.
Calling the proposal a “fair piece of legislation,” Obenshain added, “This protects our status here in the commonwealth of Virginia, ensures that we remain a vibrant, growing economy, and is an opportunity for each of us to reaffirm our commitment to our ‘right-to-work’ laws.”
Sen. Jennifer Carroll Foy, D-Prince William, sharply criticized the measure, invoking the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to emphasize the negative impacts of “right-to-work” laws on workers and unions.
“Yesterday was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and I would like to remind the body of his full quote in 1961,” Carroll Foy said, citing the Civil Rights leader. “‘Right to work’ is a false slogan because ‘right-to-work’ laws provide neither rights nor work, and are in fact designed to rob us of our civil rights and job rights and to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone.’”
Carroll Foy also pointed to Virginia voters’ dismissal of a similar ballot measure nine years ago, noting, “Virginians have voted, the voters have spoken, and Virginians have rejected this measure. Instead of using this time to undo the will of Virginians, we should be working on bills and budgets that uplift and help Virginia workers.”
Advocates of the amendment framed it as a safeguard for worker freedom and the state’s pro-business reputation. Among them were Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears and Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who held a press conference earlier on Tuesday to voice their support for Obenshain’s amendment.
Earle-Sears, who is seeking the Republican nomination for governor, emphasized that the proposal was not “anti-union” but rather “pro-worker,” framing it as a measure to protect individual choice. “It should not be controversial to pass,” she said, adding that the amendment was about allowing workers to decide how much of their money they keep.
While Virginia’s “right-to-work laws” have been codified for decades with little challenge, Youngkin, too, argued that more was necessary to protect against potential efforts to repeal it in the future.
“This constitutional amendment is critically important to make sure that the constant pressure to undermine this core building block in Virginia’s competitiveness to succeed is protected,” Youngkin said, referencing past statements by his 2021 gubernatorial opponent, former Gov. Terry McAuliffe.
While the Democrat expressed general support for “right-to-work” laws during his campaign, Youngkin noted that his opponent had also signaled openness to repeal efforts in the past.
During the committee hearing, business groups spoke in favor of the amendment, highlighting the importance of various options in the workplace.
Brandon Robinson of the Associated General Contractors of Virginia said, “On behalf of our hundreds of members and the thousands of workers they employ in the commonwealth who currently have the choice to join a union or to not join a union, we adamantly support this.”
Julia Hammond, representing the Associated Builders & Contractors Virginia Chapter, echoed that sentiment. “We too support this amendment, we support the choice that it puts inside the constitution, much like other constitutional amendments. Choice is very important,” she said.
Labor advocates and unions pushed back, arguing that the amendment is unnecessary and distracts from efforts to improve workers’ rights. Doris Crouse-Mays, president of the Virginia AFL-CIO, also reminded lawmakers of the failed 2016 attempt.
“We stand in opposition to this,” Crouse-Mays said. “We should be focused on things that benefit workers, like raising the minimum wage and giving all public service workers the freedom to collectively bargain. And if we want to talk about choices for workers, and that is our interest, then workers should have the choice to join the union if they want to in an atmosphere that is free of intimidation and fear.”
Committee member Sen. Glenn Sturtevant, R-Chesterfield, voiced frustration with the opposition to the proposed amendment.
“I guess I’m kind of confused,” Sturtevant said, addressing union representatives who testified against the measure. “I can’t imagine a better protection for union members than putting this protection, preserving their right to work in a labor union, in the constitution.”
Sturtevant suggested that objections were driven by political motives, adding, “I’m sort of really kind of shocked that the unions we heard testify today would be opposed to having this language in the constitution.”
Obenshain, the amendment’s sponsor, defended the proposal and challenged arguments that it lacked public support. He noted that while an identical amendment was previously rejected by voters, the margin was narrow. “The vote was not overwhelming back in 2016, it was a single-digit margin,” Obenshain said.
He argued that assurances at the time from lawmakers that “right-to-work” laws would remain unchallenged influenced the outcome.
“Those comments make it clear that our ‘right-to-work’ laws are controversial,” Obenshain said, acknowledging a divide on the issue. “We’re entitled to fair-minded differences on issues that are important to us, and this is important to Senator Carroll Foy. It’s important to me, too. We just happen to have a different opinion on this.”
Committee Chair Sen. Aaron Rouse, D-Virginia Beach, offered a passionate defense of unions and their role in protecting workers, framing the amendment as part of broader efforts to weaken organized labor.
“As a member of a union myself, the unions are under attack today,” Rouse said. He criticized what he described as “union-busting techniques” seen across the country, adding, “We need to understand that the federal minimum wage, even the minimum wage that Democrats tried to pass, has not kept up with the cost of living.”
Rouse highlighted the struggles many workers face, from rising healthcare costs to balancing basic needs like housing, childcare, and transportation. “These are all issues relevant to making sure that people’s dignity is reflected in their paycheck, something that unions stand strong for,” he said.
He argued that unions play a critical role in addressing income inequality, which he called one of the defining challenges of the era.
“At a time where we have seen the largest wealth income gap, where 99% of the wealth is accumulated in the top one percent, who’s speaking for the little guys? This is what unions do, so I am proud to be a part of the union,” Rouse concluded.
Reporter Charlotte Rene Woods contributed to this story.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.