I suppose it means that you wouldn't even be able to get a job at a closed shop unless you were already a member of the union.

That doesn't seem practically any different. I still have to support the union if I want to work.

If you want to work at a company there are lots of aspects of corporate culture and working environments that you have to accept if you want to work there. Presumably if you don't want to work in a union shop... you won't?

And to put another way: would it be reasonable for you to benefit from the work the union does for all employees without also contributing to that union?

All this is besides the point that requiring employees to join the union is a decision the _employer_ would have to make (although probably through union pressure).

> would it be reasonable for you to benefit from the work the union does for all employees without also contributing to that union?

If I never asked for the union or their collective bargaining, then yes. It's like cleaning my windows when I never asked you to and then demanding cash for it.

No, it's not like that at all. You are legally allowed to opt out of paying union dues.

So you'll pay 'fees' instead of 'dues'. Pretty meaningless difference isn't it?

It means that the union can't (eg) control supply by limiting union membership.