'Without Any Warning, the Rules Have Changed'

'Without Any Warning, the Rules Have Changed'

  New York Times Pundit: Reckless Obama NLRB 'Paralyzing' Economy (Source: September 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) For years, New York Times commentator Joe Nocera has been one of the most relentless champions of government regulation of business and "stimulus" spending in the American media. When even Mr. Nocera starts agreeing with critics of a presidential administration that it has gone "too far" in interfering with the decision-making of businesses and their employees, that administration clearly has a serious problem. Therefore, Mr. Nocera's August 23 Times column about the ongoing effort by Acting National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Lafe Solomon to dictate where businesses may or may not expand should have set off alarm bells at the White House. Mr. Solomon's immediate target is Boeing and its employees in Right to Work South Carolina. In April, he filed a complaint against the company, America's biggest exporter of manufactured products, for initiating a new 787 Dreamliner assembly line in North Charleston. As Mr. Nocera observed in his column bemoaning this Solomon power grab, "Boeing's aircraft assembly has long been done by its unionized work force in Puget Sound, Wash." Indeed, seven Dreaminers will still be assembled each month in Puget Sound. "The South Carolina facility," Mr. Nocera explained, "is a hedge against the possibility" that International Association of Machinists (IAM) union kingpins will order unionized employees in Puget Sound out on strike, and thus "shut down production of the Dreamliner." A 'Mind-Boggling Stretch' To Characterize Boeing's Strategy as 'Retaliation'
Right to Work Debated in State Capitals

Right to Work Debated in State Capitals

    But National Forced-Dues Repeal Measure Still Being Held Back (Source: September 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) Not long ago, Big Labor was crowing about having thwarted citizen efforts to pass new Right to Work laws in Indiana and New Hampshire this year. But it's now clear that the boasts of the union bosses were premature. Legislative support for abolishing compulsory union membership, dues and fees has been and remains strong in both the Hoosier and Granite States. Union lobbyists have therefore had to rely heavily on Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-Ind.) and union-label Gov. John Lynch (D-N.H.) to prevent enactment of America's 23rd and 24th state Right to Work laws. But now Mr. Daniels, under increasing heat from thousands and thousands of freedom-loving Hoosiers, including many who have supported him in the past, is signaling that he may reconsider his opposition to legislative votes on Right to Work measures in Indianapolis next year. Meanwhile, Mr. Lynch's late-spring veto of H.B.474, which would prohibit the firing of New Hampshire employees for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union, may now potentially be overridden because of a sustained Right to Work lobbying campaign. States Can't Afford to Ignore Fact That Compulsory Unionism Hinders Economic Growth "In the two years since the severe 2008-9 national recession officially ended, most state economies have recovered only feebly, if at all," commented National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix. "That's why many Indianans and New Hampshirites, along with the citizens of a number of other states that have yet to enact Right to Work laws, are now emphatically telling their elected officials that they can't afford to ignore the fact that compulsory unionism hinders economic growth. "Trends in employee compensation, that is, wages, salaries, bonuses and benefits, illustrate well the Right to Work growth advantage. "From 2000 to 2010, the inflation-adjusted outlays of private-sector businesses for employee compensation increased by an average of 11.8% in Right to Work states. That increase is nine times as great as forced-unionism states' combined 1.3% rise over the same period. "Twenty of the 22 Right to Work states experienced a real compensation increase greater than the national average of 4.9%. And 14 of the 15 states with the lowest real compensation growth lack a Right to Work law." Mr. Mix added that faster growth constitutes only a part of Right to Work states' edge. Adjusting for regional differences in living costs with the help of indices created by the non-partisan Missouri Economic Research and Information Center (MERIC), in 2010 the average compensation per private-sector employee in Right to Work states was $56,830. That's roughly $1100 more than the average for forced-unionism states. Cost of Living-Adjusted Compensation Higher In Right to Work States

Right to Work Wins Again

Development Counselors International (DCI) ranked the top five and the bottom five states, in terms of what states provide an economic climate most favorable to business. The rankings show that states following right-to-work laws held the top five spots, while states following more union-friendly rules held the bottom five spots. DCI asked corporate executives and representatives to name the three states they thought provided the "most favorable business climates," and the three states least favorable to business. Texas ranked #1 in the final survey results, while California ranked dead last at #50. DCI provided this commentary on the results: Common themes of low operating costs and a pro-business environment emerge for the top five [original emphasis]. Positive responses emphasized costs, low taxes and incentive offerings, while negative opinions cited high taxes, anti-business climates and fiscal problems/state deficits. Here are the top five states, in order: Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Florida. Here are the bottom five states, starting with with the worst ranked: California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, Michigan.
Barone: Obama acts like Big Labor shop steward in chief

Barone: Obama acts like Big Labor shop steward in chief

Trying to increase the number of workers who are forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment is perhaps the TOP priority for President Obama at the moment.  Michael Barone takes the president to task for his consistent refusal to say no to the union bosses.  Here is his rundown: [Obama] certainly can demonstrate that he cares about certain jobs -- the 7 percent of private-sector jobs and 36 percent of public-sector jobs held by union members. During his two years and nine months as president, he has worked time and again to increase the number of unionized jobs. Some pro-union moves have a certain ritual quality. Democratic presidents on taking office seek to strengthen federal employee unions. Fully one-third of the $820 billion stimulus package passed almost entirely with Democratic votes in 2009 was aid to state and local governments. This was intended to keep state and local public employee union members -- much more numerous than federal employees -- on the job and to keep taxpayer-funded union dues pouring into public employee union treasuries. In arranging the Chrysler bankruptcy, the Obama White House muscled aside the secured creditors who ordinarily have priority in bankruptcy proceedings in favor of United Auto Workers [union]. That's an episode that I labeled "gangster government." Former Obama economic adviser Lawrence Summers protested that his White House colleague Ron Bloom had made similar arrangements before. But in those cases Bloom was working for the unions, not for a supposedly neutral government.