General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWages are Lower in Right to Work States
Last edited Sat Aug 6, 2016, 03:01 PM - Edit history (1)
Let me explain "Right to Work". Don't be fooled by the name. It has no connection to the law. Think of the Democratic Republic of North Korea. Guess what? North Korea really isn't a Democracy, despite the name.
What "Right to Work" laws do is allow employees in a unionized group to opt out the union and opt out of paying dues. But, they still receive all the benefits, including the higher wages, the better benefits, seniority and union protection. The union, by force of federal law, must provide all the services afforded the dues paying union members to those who opt out. The only thing the "objector" can't do is vote in elections, attend meetings or ratify contracts. They still have the full force of grievance and arbitration (a very cosly process) for free. Any union officer is subject to fines and charges by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) if they fail to provide those services "to the best of his or her ability." It should be noted that in the modern era, only states that gained full control of all three branches of the government (house, senate and Governor) has this law passed. It can only be rescinded if pro-union Democrats gain control of all three branches.
In non-"RTW" states, employees can opt out, but must pay what's known as an agency fee. Usually an amount that ranges between 85% and 92% of their dues. This culls away any political cost associated with the union, and the payment is for what the NLRB decides is work-place services, including bargaining.
In RTW states, as you can imagine, workers decide they can get something for nothing. After they see dues money going to protect employees who are screw-ups, hate the union and don't pay dues, pretty soon nobody does. It was a great Right Wing ploy to use human nature to get individuals to screw themselves. Union membership is such states has plummeted.
To make the point of how sinister this law is, Labor Unions are the only organization to be forced, under the penalty of federal law, to provide a service for free. No place else. Not even hospitals that have to take emergency patients without insurance. Even they get to draw from a pool created for such cases by insurance companies or are paid by the government. Only unions are forced to proved services for free without reimbursement.
What has been the result? RTW states have fewer good jobs and the wages in the RTW states are dramatically lower. So, when our Repuke friends say that the economy looks good, but wages are stagnant, point them to this linked article.
As anecdotal evidence., I am a Business Agent negotiating and servicing 35 small to medium sized union contracts in Boston and their suburbs. For the 3 years that I've handled this new job, everyone has received a raise of between 2 and a half and 3 and half % per year, including higher benefits.
The reason wages have not kept up with the recovery, is that more than half the country (26 states) are RTW. Unions built the middle class in this country, so, as unions go, so goes the middle class.
Right to Work
<snip>Extremist groups, right-wing politicians and their corporate backers want to weaken the power of workers and their unions through "right to work" laws. Their efforts are a partisan political ploy that undermines the basic rights of workers. By making unions weaker, these laws lower wages and living standards for all workers in the state. In fact, workers in states with these laws earn an average of $5,971 less a year than workers in other states. Because of the higher wages, working families in states without these laws also benefit from healthier tax bases that improve their quality of life. <snip>
States with Right to Work Laws Have:
Lower Wages and Incomes
The average worker in states with right to work laws makes $5,971 (12.2 percent) less annually than workers in states without right to when all other factors are removed than workers in other states.2
Median household income in states with these laws is $6,568 (11.8 percent) less than in other states ($49,220 vs. $55,788).3
In states with right to work laws, 25.9 percent of jobs are in low-wage occupations, compared with 18.0 percent of jobs in other states.<snip>
Link:
http://www.aflcio.org/Legislation-and-Politics/State-Legislative-Battles/Ongoing-State-Legislative-Attacks/Right-to-Work
onecaliberal
(32,864 posts)"Right to work" bullshit is all about.
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,763 posts)pervasive, and highly effective at what they do. Some reasonable people have fallen for the lies. So we need to have an even bigger and better machine to counter their BS. I'm not sure we do.
louis c
(8,652 posts)very few people know the details on right to work.
onecaliberal
(32,864 posts)Backing this crap because their still anti abortion. If you think workers in the south don't understand this you are misreading it badly.
louis c
(8,652 posts)"they're still anti-abortion", not "their still anti abortion". Spell check doesn't correct grammar.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)or join a union. You might be surprised.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)given that consumer spending makes up 70% of the GDP, anything that weakens consumer spending weakens the GDP.
And a weaker GDP means less taxes collected, which in turn negatively impacts social spending and the safety net.
shenmue
(38,506 posts)benld74
(9,904 posts)doc03
(35,348 posts)They should be rolling in cash with all those new jobs.
benld74
(9,904 posts)Talk on the 'right' of workers to NOT have Union dues taken from paychecks. THIS is the 1st thing that is attempted.
Talk on how the Union Dues PAY Union leaders to undermine workers overall
Talk on the ability of businesses to choose workers they NEED when the need them
lindysalsagal
(20,692 posts)Thanks for posting.
RTW almost became a reality in all states when the SCOTUS finally took up agency in june.
Had they reversed the agency rule, the entire country would have become RTW in one blow.
If you work in an institution that has collective bargaining, agency means you have to pay the portion of the union dues that affect your working conditions: It's the fair thing to do, since everyone gets the benefits of collective bargaining.
Without unions, we'd have 70-80 hour work weeks, no job protection, no benefits, no limits to what management could do to workers.
Many people fail to recognize that even if they're not union, the unions set the standards that most companies adhere to.
Every worker in america benefits from unions.
Never wrong to bring this up from time to time.
Right now, especially, with the GOP imploding, we should expect new readers here. Let's not insult them if they've taken the time to join us and catch up on what the media have neglected to tell them.
Welcome, any and all new readers! Post your questions, and if you want to pm me about anything, I'll answer.
Wolf Frankula
(3,601 posts)My Union said that thirty years ago and it's still true.
Wolf
louis c
(8,652 posts)Tobin S.
(10,418 posts)Martin Eden
(12,870 posts)... you know that decades of Fox & Limbaugh have served their corporate masters well.
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)That's what the laws were FOR, duh!
rocktivity
louis c
(8,652 posts)Skittles
(153,169 posts)should be called "Right to Work for Less"