Blocking the progressive city: How state pre-emptions undermine labour rights in the USA

While some US cities and states have taken the lead in protecting labour rights, a counter-trend is found in state pre-emptions - state laws that prohibit cities from making any ordinances or laws related to certain policy areas. What drives these state-level actions that undermine progressive city leadership in the USA? We examine recent state legislations that pre-empt city authority to regulate labour conditions and protect labour rights in the private and public sectors (i.e. minimum wage, paid leave, fair scheduling, right to work, prevailing wage). We use a 50-state regression model to explore what differentiates states with more pre-emption of labour rights and potential sources of pushback. States with low minimum wages, which have never had strong labour protections, pre-empt more. Unions can be sources of pushback - greater unionisation is linked to fewer pre-emptions. However, in Republican-controlled states, more unionisation is linked to more pre-emptions. We use Wisconsin as an example of a state that adopted anti-union policies - despite strong pushback from the public - to explore how strong labour protections can act as a 'trigger' for states to undermine labour rights.

Automated summary

In the United States, some states have laws that restrict cities from enacting ordinances related to labour rights, with states with lower minimum wages and weaker union presence more likely to do so. Unions can serve as a source of pushback against these pre-emption laws, but in Republican-controlled states, higher unionisation rates are associated with more pre-emption of labour rights. Using Wisconsin as an example, strong labour protections can trigger states to undermine labour rights despite public pushback.