Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
Wed Feb 4, 2015, 05:14 PM Feb 2015

The Progressive: Right-to-Work Laws Are a Fatal "Cure" (X-post from Labor)

http://www.progressive.org/news/2015/02/187983/right-work-laws-are-fatal-cure

In Wisconsin, for example, the Republicans are eagerly advancing a prescription for sagging wages and opportunities in the private sector that would certainly result in a fatal “cure” or workers’ plight: a “right-to-work” law. Right-to-work laws are intended expressly to weaken unions by banning labor organizations from collecting fees from all workers who benefit from their extensive and costly efforts. This gives management a powerful incentive to divide workers by pressuring new workers to avoid financial support for the union.

Eventually, this translates into the erosion and near-complete decimation of unions in right-to-work states, the decline of worker safety, the marginalization of advocates for a strong social net, and predictably, primitive indicators of neglected health and educational needs. Instead, reflecting the hollowing-out of real democracy right-to-work states, these state typically neglect social needs and lavish vast public “incentives” on huge and profitable corporations.

But to avoid discussing the deplorable results of right-to-work laws, the Wisconsin Right to Work group––with close ties to Americans for Prosperity, the Koch brothers (see here, here, and here), and the well-funded Bradley Foundation––is raising the phantom specter of a non-existent threat called “forced unionism.” In reality, no one in the United States can ever be compelled to become a union member under any circumstances.

...

Drawing on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Congressional Research Service concluded in a December, 2012 report that states permitting “fair-share” or union-security” provisions showed sharply higher median wages: $50,867 compared with $43,641 in right-to-work states, a 16.5 percent differential amounting to $7,226 per year. Numerous other studies confirm this substantial advantage for workers in states allowing “fair share” contracts, while those in right-to-work states banning “fair-share” contracts suffering significantly lower pay and benefits.



Click through to the article for more information and links.
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Progressive: Right-to-Work Laws Are a Fatal "Cure" (X-post from Labor) (Original Post) Scuba Feb 2015 OP
K & R !!! WillyT Feb 2015 #1
right to work for less guillaumeb Feb 2015 #2
First, welcome (belatedly) to DU. Second ... Scuba Feb 2015 #3
Right-to-work (Taft-Hartley) is the worst thing to happen to unions. Progressive countries do not pampango Feb 2015 #4

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
2. right to work for less
Wed Feb 4, 2015, 05:30 PM
Feb 2015

The 1% obsess about unions because, in my view, unions are able to educate and organize a working class that otherwise would be at the mercy of the capitalists. Even though white male workers frequently support Republicans, white male union members generally vote democratic.

I am sure that the Kochs, the Waltons, the Scaifes and the Bradleys secretly wish for a feudal style society. With them as the aristocracy of course.

The problem is the word freedom. Republicans talk about freedom from unions, selling the notion that in a Republican utopia, all workers would be "free" to go to Wal Mart, or McDonalds, and "freely" negotiate appropriate wages. As if a peasant could negotiate with the king!

Even in a closed-shop union workplace, union membership is not compelled. People who do not wish to join merely have to pay what are called "fair-representation" fees. That is, they pay for the cost of representing them because all unions are legally required to represent all workers in a bargaining unit.

From a 40 year retired union member who was a Union Steward/Representative for 33 years.

Great post Scuba!

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
3. First, welcome (belatedly) to DU. Second ...
Wed Feb 4, 2015, 05:37 PM
Feb 2015

... your views on the oligarch's obsession is on the money. Unions give voice to the little people, so the wealthy oppose them.

Thanks for your reply, and for your 33 years as a Union Steward.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
4. Right-to-work (Taft-Hartley) is the worst thing to happen to unions. Progressive countries do not
Wed Feb 4, 2015, 05:48 PM
Feb 2015

have right-to-work states along side with 'union' states. Their unions don't have to worry about companies moving from one state to another to avoid strong unions. Moving within the same country allows companies to keep access to the same transportation, education and legal networks. Right-to-work allows them to maintain all of this and weak unions at the same time.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Progressive: Right-t...