On a lark, I did a search on “quorum” in the Brevier Legislative reports, and the first thing I came across was from February 1871. Thirty-four Republicans resigned so that the Democrats could not pass an apportionment bill that apparently would have redistricted in a way that was very detrimental to the Republicans.
The House Democrats did not, apparently, resist the notion that they couldn’t do business with fewer than 67 members of the House present; but, as part of the discussions, they threw it in the face of the House Republicans that the Republicans had apparently ratified the Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in the absence of a quorum of the House.
This article out of the Indiana Magazine of History (assuming the link works) gives some historical information about quorum busting in the Indiana General Assembly. In addition to the 1871 incident, the Republicans withdrew in 1865 to resist the Militia Bill (giving militia members the right to choose company commanders and the General Assembly the right to appoint certain generals). And, the Democrats had resigned in 1869 to resist the 15th Amendment. (The article I was reading was from 1913, so it wouldn’t have information about quorum busting after that date.)
The Constitutional provision in question is Art. 4, sec. 11 which provides:
Section 11. Two-thirds of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may meet, adjourn from day to day, and compel the attendance of absent members. A quorum being in attendance, if either House fail to effect an organization within the first five days thereafter, the members of the House so failing, shall be entitled to no compensation, from the end of the said five days until an organization shall have been effected.
Not sure if the House Democrats are committed enough to opposing Right to Work to resign (as opposed to merely remaining absent); but I wonder what RTW proponents would do in response if that happened.