Forced-Dues Drive Pennsylvania Public Union Salaries, Outpace Private Sector's and Members' Wages

Forced-Dues Drive Pennsylvania Public Union Salaries, Outpace Private Sector's and Members' Wages

Forced-dues continue to fill the coffers of unions, as well as, union presidents'  and politicians' pockets according to this recent study by the Commonwealth Foundation: Government Unions and Forced Dues Almost half of government workers in Pennsylvania are union members, compared to 9.3 percent in the private sector. Pennsylvania is a forced union state, meaning that workers can be forced to join a union or pay a [so-called] "fair share fee" just to keep their job.  Most government units in Pennsylvania are "agency shops," with a specified union to which workers must pay a fee. When state and local governments automatically deduct dues and fair share fees from government workers' paychecks—as is the practice in Pennsylvania—employees have little or no say in how their money is used. Union Bosses Union bosses collect hefty salaries derived from member dues and fair share fees. In most cases, the salaries are several times the average union member's annual pay. While acknowledging that budgets were tight, AFSCME Council 13 President David Fillman got a 6 percent raise in 2010, making his salary higher than Gov. Tom Corbett's. Dues and fees often go towards expensive conferences, outings and junkets.  For example, in 2009-10 the Pennsylvania State Education Association—the state's largest public sector union—spent: More than $250,000 on a board of directors retreat in Gettysburg. More than $89,000 for a "political institution meeting" at the Radisson Penn Harris in Camp Hill, Pa. $20,000 for advertising in the Pittsburgh Steelers Yearbook. Almost $5,900 at Kimberton Golf Club and more than $5,100 at Concord Country Club in Chadd's Ford. Political Activity and Lobbying
Public Servants' Right to Work in Jeopardy

Public Servants' Right to Work in Jeopardy

The experience of state after state shows that public-sector compulsory unionism as well as private-sector compulsory unionism devours job- and income-creating opportunities for taxpaying businesses and employees. Credit: Michael Ramirez/Investors Business Daily  Union Bosses Aim to Kill Recent Buckeye State Reform Next Month (Source: October 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) Over the past decade, the citizens of forced-unionism Ohio have been afflicted with one of the worst-performing state economies in the country. Across the U.S. as a whole, despite the severe recent recession, private employers' inflation-adjusted outlays for employee compensation (including wages, salaries, bonuses and benefits) did increase from 2000 to 2010, by an average of 4.3%. And many states fared much better than that. In the 22 states with Right to Work laws on the books protecting both private- and public-sector employees from being fired for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union, real private-sector employee compensation grew by an aggregate 11.3%. Private employees in 20 of the 22 Right to Work states experienced 2000-2010 compensation growth greater than the national average. Unfortunately, in the 28 states without Right to Work laws on the books, private-sector outlays for employee compensation rose only by a combined 0.7%, after adjusting for inflation. Thirteen of the 14 states with the lowest compensation growth lack a Right to Work law. Ohio was one of just five states with negative real private-sector compensation growth over the last decade. In 2010, Ohio's business expenditures for private employee compensation were 6.6% less than they had been in 2000. Region, Job Mix Can't Account For Buckeye State's Shrinking Private Employee Compensation When confronted with such data, apologists for the forced-unionism policies that prevailed across the board in Ohio for decades until this year try to explain them away by blaming the Buckeye State's location in the U.S. Midwest or its historically high manufacturing density for its abysmal economic record. But such excuses won't wash.
Public Servants' Right to Work in Jeopardy

Public Servants' Right to Work in Jeopardy

The experience of state after state shows that public-sector compulsory unionism as well as private-sector compulsory unionism devours job- and income-creating opportunities for taxpaying businesses and employees. Credit: Michael Ramirez/Investors Business Daily  Union Bosses Aim to Kill Recent Buckeye State Reform Next Month (Source: October 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) Over the past decade, the citizens of forced-unionism Ohio have been afflicted with one of the worst-performing state economies in the country. Across the U.S. as a whole, despite the severe recent recession, private employers' inflation-adjusted outlays for employee compensation (including wages, salaries, bonuses and benefits) did increase from 2000 to 2010, by an average of 4.3%. And many states fared much better than that. In the 22 states with Right to Work laws on the books protecting both private- and public-sector employees from being fired for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union, real private-sector employee compensation grew by an aggregate 11.3%. Private employees in 20 of the 22 Right to Work states experienced 2000-2010 compensation growth greater than the national average. Unfortunately, in the 28 states without Right to Work laws on the books, private-sector outlays for employee compensation rose only by a combined 0.7%, after adjusting for inflation. Thirteen of the 14 states with the lowest compensation growth lack a Right to Work law. Ohio was one of just five states with negative real private-sector compensation growth over the last decade. In 2010, Ohio's business expenditures for private employee compensation were 6.6% less than they had been in 2000. Region, Job Mix Can't Account For Buckeye State's Shrinking Private Employee Compensation When confronted with such data, apologists for the forced-unionism policies that prevailed across the board in Ohio for decades until this year try to explain them away by blaming the Buckeye State's location in the U.S. Midwest or its historically high manufacturing density for its abysmal economic record. But such excuses won't wash.
New evidence "Right To Work boon for Oklahoma"

New evidence "Right To Work boon for Oklahoma"

Families are fleeing compulsory unionism states and moving to Right Work States like Oklahoma.  And, that is not all that is OKay in Oklahoma since it became the 22nd Right To Work state in 2001.  From a recent analysis by J. Scott Moody and Wendy P. Warcholik of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs: On September 25, 2001, Oklahoma voters went to the polls and passed a constitutional amendment—Right to Work (RTW)—which gave workers the choice to join or financially support a union. This made Oklahoma the 22nd state in the union to join the ranks of Right To Work states. Fast forward to today, and opponents of the law are still at work trying to discredit it. A recent study by the [Big Labor related] Economic Policy Institute (EPI), for example, claimed that Right To Work in Oklahoma has been a dismal failure. One of EPI’s most important pieces of evidence is that manufacturing employment is lower today than it was before Right To Work. [However,] the EPI study did not consider whether Oklahoma’s manufacturing industry may have chosen to boost productivity instead of hiring more workers. Chart 1 shows the growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the manufacturing industry from 2003 to 2010 using a growth index. Oklahoma’s manufacturing GDP has grown 45 percent in that time period, outstripping that of the average manufacturing growth in in non-Right To Work states (22 percent).
New evidence

New evidence "Right To Work boon for Oklahoma"

Families are fleeing compulsory unionism states and moving to Right Work States like Oklahoma.  And, that is not all that is OKay in Oklahoma since it became the 22nd Right To Work state in 2001.  From a recent analysis by J. Scott Moody and Wendy P. Warcholik of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs: On September 25, 2001, Oklahoma voters went to the polls and passed a constitutional amendment—Right to Work (RTW)—which gave workers the choice to join or financially support a union. This made Oklahoma the 22nd state in the union to join the ranks of Right To Work states. Fast forward to today, and opponents of the law are still at work trying to discredit it. A recent study by the [Big Labor related] Economic Policy Institute (EPI), for example, claimed that Right To Work in Oklahoma has been a dismal failure. One of EPI’s most important pieces of evidence is that manufacturing employment is lower today than it was before Right To Work. [However,] the EPI study did not consider whether Oklahoma’s manufacturing industry may have chosen to boost productivity instead of hiring more workers. Chart 1 shows the growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the manufacturing industry from 2003 to 2010 using a growth index. Oklahoma’s manufacturing GDP has grown 45 percent in that time period, outstripping that of the average manufacturing growth in in non-Right To Work states (22 percent).