American Thinker: Right to Work and Individual Rights

Sylvia Bokor outlines the critical connection between the Right to Work and individual rights: The Right to Work clause came into existence in 1935, embedded in the Taft-Hartely Law. It means that (a) employees may not be forced to join a union, that (b) employers need not hire only those who agree to join a union, and (c) that employers need not fire employees for failing to join a union or pay union dues. What does this mean in dollars and cents? Consider one of the worse-case scenarios: the Nelson Index ranks New Mexico, a non-Right to Work state, below the national average. Recently, the Rio Grande Foundation published its study of the effect of Right to Work on business growth and increased personal income in New Mexico. The Foundation concluded that were New Mexico to become a Right to Work state, "[b]y 2020, New Mexico would have 42,300 more people working ... [and that] the state's personal income would be nearly $5 billion higher, and wage and salary income would be $2.2 billion higher." But why? Why does prohibiting the use of force have such a hugely beneficial effect on economic growth and prosperity? The National Institute of Labor Relations Research answers the question. Mr. Greer begins his article by correctly identifying the foundation of the Right to Work clause: "Big Labor propaganda against Right to Work legislation and laws rarely focuses on the principle at stake: freedom of association." Later he states: "... Right to Work laws are not merely or even primarily an economic development tool. Right to Work laws and legislation are really a matter of freedom, not economics." True. But go deeper still. Individual rights are the foundation of freedom. "Freedom is the absence of force." Without individual rights, freedom does not exist. To the extent one's rights are violated, to that extent is one's freedom is curtailed, ultimately to be destroyed altogether. By definition, individual rights include the assurance that no man may violate the rights of another with impunity. A culture permeated by freedom is a culture enjoying the essential condition for prosperity: protection and recognition of individual rights. Philosophically, the Right to Work clause is the recognition of man's right to think for himself, to make his own choices and decisions -- i.e., his right to life. Personal happiness fuels productivity. Prosperity results. So why do union bosses continue to block implementation of the RTW clause?
New Mexico is Right for Right to Work

New Mexico is Right for Right to Work

[media-credit id=7 align="alignright" width="300"][/media-credit]Eric Fruits, the president and chief economist at Economics International Corp., an economics consulting firm, makes the case on why passing a Right to Work statute in New Mexico would help create jobs and prosperity: Right-to-work legislation is one of the very few pro-growth policies that is virtually costless to enact. And a large body of research has found that it benefits states economically. New Mexico, along with much of the country, still struggles to recover from a recession that began more than four years ago. While the state has benefited from the recent energy boom, states like New Mexico have struggled to cope with the employment consequences of the recession. In response, policymakers have tended to focus on fiscal policies such as tax cuts and “stimulus spending” rather than market structural solutions. Right-to-work laws can be a key component of a pro-investment and pro-employment package for New Mexico that encourages firms to locate and expand in the state. A large body of research has found that, as a group, right-to-work states have enjoyed more rapid employment growth, better job preservation and faster recoveries from recession that states without right-to-work laws in place. New Mexico has recognized this when the Legislature passed right-to-work legislation twice – in 1979 and 1981 – only to see the legislation vetoed by then-Gov. Bruce King. Proponents of right-to-work legislation argue that individuals should have the choice of whether or not to join a union and that the choice of whether to join a union should not be a condition of employment. They point to the relatively rapid growth in employment and incomes in right-to-work states relative to non-right-to-work states.