General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: why I suspect reaction to Hobby Lobby is somewhat hair-on-fire [View all]Chan790
(20,176 posts)1.) They probably will. Why pay for service you can get for free? "Here's an extra $5/week in your paycheck and better health insurance, you can pay me for getting these for you or not." Few people turn down a free ride unfortunately.
2.) Expansions of RtW laws like this generally depress wages across the board, both inside and outside the affected employment sector. That is, it's likely to going to depress wages and benefits of everybody, not merely the union membership. Home-care workers will leave for other jobs once their benefits and wage recede...jobs they will likely take for less than the workers they're displacing, those workers in-turn displace-down other workers. Worse, these displacements generally skew demographically towards women and minorities. It has a potential compensation cratering effect across the landscape, particularly for those with less skills-education or college within most-affected groups.
It doesn't just affect union membership. I'm not saying either is unimportant...they both need to be combated. One just seems to be getting a disproportionate amount of attention in light of the joint and separate consequences to all women of these rulings. We can't dedicate so much energy to combating Hobby-Lobby that we fail to combat them harming women in other ways that are less immediately-obvious.
There is more than one front in this war on women from conservatives.