"Right to work" is one of those legal principles that follows a dystopian naming scheme. It was lobbied for by the owner class because it allows freeloaders to benefit from collective bargaining without paying membership dues in the union representing them. This weakens the union, with the eventual goal of eliminating the union (and the benefits it negotiated for workers) altogether.

Your alternative puts workers in a straitjacket of having to belong to a union to work certain places. You say it's for their good. But all I see is the straitjacket.

And yet the alternative is not being allowed to work unless you donate money to extraordinarily political organizations who lobby for policies you may actively oppose.

Sorry, but I’m going to call the compelled speech option far more dystopian than right to work.