If Alberta’s union leadership really intends to test its strength with a province-wide strike, the government’s response should be simple and decisive: introduce right-to-work legislation.Such a law wouldn’t abolish unions or strip workers of their rights. It would reaffirm a principle every free society should uphold — that no Canadian should be forced to join or fund a union to keep a job.Freedom of association cuts both ways. .Talk of a “general strike” began when Premier Danielle Smith used the notwithstanding clause to send teachers back to work after a three-week shutdown that left hundreds of thousands of students in limbo. The Back to School Act not only reopened classrooms but also promised to hire more teachers and improve support for special-needs students. It was an attempt at balance — protect students, address concerns, restore normal life.Union leaders, however, called it a declaration of war. Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan vowed to mobilize “an unprecedented response” across the province, warning that a general strike was now “on the table.”You might also want to listen to my friend and colleague Cory Morgan on the subject..WATCH LIVE: Bring on right to work legislation!.What the AFL is doing is not collective bargaining. It’s political brinkmanship. Unions play a necessary, even praiseworthy role when they negotiate fair contracts and represent their members in grievance proceedings. But if they want to go beyond that and become a political force outside the electoral system, to seek power and to overthrow a duly elected government… (tell me again what the NDP is for?) well, it demonstrates exactly why Alberta should revisit the entire structure of compulsory unionism..For emphasis: Alberta’s labour movement is not just defending contracts — it’s trying to dictate government policy. When unelected officials talk antifa and threaten to “throw sand in the gears” of an elected government, they move from representing workers to trying to rule in their place.Right-to-work legislation would return the balance of power to where it belongs: with individual workers. No one would be prevented from joining a union, but neither would anyone be compelled to. Unions would still exist, but they would have to earn support — not extract it.That reform would also blunt the threat of a politically motivated general strike. If participation were voluntary, union bosses couldn’t automatically draft thousands of unwilling workers into an ideological fight. Alberta’s economy — energy, agriculture, transport, and small business — would be protected from paralysis by a handful of activists playing at class warfare..This isn’t uncharted territory. Several U.S. states with right-to-work laws have seen higher job growth, more investment, and greater worker choice. The principle is simple: prosperity follows freedom.Alberta, of all places, should understand that.Union leaders frame their struggle as a defence of democracy. In reality, democracy is exactly what they’re challenging. Alberta’s government was elected to govern. McGowan and his allies were not.If they wish to change laws, they can stand for election. If they wish to strike, they can — within limits that protect public safety and essential services. But if they mean to bring down a government through coercion, that crosses the line from negotiation to subversion.Smith’s decision to use the notwithstanding clause was an assertion of authority — the proper one in a constitutional democracy. Her next step should be equally clear-eyed: protect Alberta’s freedom to work, to govern, and to prosper.Right-to-work isn’t a reactionary measure. It’s the logical defence against an old-fashioned power grab dressed up as social justice. If the unions want to escalate, let them. The government’s answer should be legislative, lawful, and lasting.Because the right to work — freely, without coercion — is one right no government should ever surrender.
