Hands Off -- Judge rules Wisconsin public union members must opt in on dues

Hands Off -- Judge rules Wisconsin public union members must opt in on dues

In a blow to Big Labor's continual push to make forced unionism the default position, unions will now have to ask people to sign up rather than require employees to figure out how to protect their paychecks from unwanted union confiscation. From Pioneer Press' Patrick Marley MADISON, Wisconsin -- State unions were dealt a setback Friday when a federal judge said they would have to get their members to opt in, rather than opt out, to having the state deduct union dues from their paychecks. What's more, the judge did not rule on dues deductions for unions that he earlier found the state improperly decertified. The state's largest unions were decertified, and the ruling -- at least for now -- will make it harder for them to get money from dues. But U.S. District Court Judge William Conley gave unions one beneficial ruling by saying that members who sign up to have their dues deducted from their paychecks can be required to make a yearlong commitment.
Right to Work States Enjoy 'Growth Advantage'

Right to Work States Enjoy 'Growth Advantage'

Compulsory Unionism Negatively Correlated With Compensation Growth (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) By prohibiting compulsory union dues, state Right to Work laws spur the growth of private-sector employee compensation in the form of wages, salaries, benefits and bonuses, as well as employment growth. Last month, the U.S. Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) issued its estimates for 2011 state personal income. The BEA also issued estimates for an array of specific kinds of income, including employee compensation, at the state level. The 2011 BEA income data in general, and the compensation data especially, show once again that there is a strong negative correlation between compulsory unionism and economic growth. Overall, private-sector employee compensation (including wages, salaries, benefits and bonuses) grew by 6.4% nationwide over the past decade, after adjusting for inflation. Historically speaking, this was slow growth. However, states that protect employees from being fired for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union typically fared far better than the rest. (From 2001 to 2011, 22 states had Right to Work laws prohibiting forced union dues on the books. Last month Indiana became the 23rd Right to Work state.) A review of how compensation and jobs grew (or failed to grow) in each state suggests the U.S. Congress could dramatically improve America's economic prospects for the next decade by repealing forced union dues and fees nationwide. Current federal law authorizes and promotes the payment of compulsory union dues and fees as condition of getting or keeping a job. Right to Work States' 2001-2011 Compensation Increase Nearly Double the National Average
Right to Work States Enjoy 'Growth Advantage'

Right to Work States Enjoy 'Growth Advantage'

Compulsory Unionism Negatively Correlated With Compensation Growth (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) By prohibiting compulsory union dues, state Right to Work laws spur the growth of private-sector employee compensation in the form of wages, salaries, benefits and bonuses, as well as employment growth. Last month, the U.S. Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) issued its estimates for 2011 state personal income. The BEA also issued estimates for an array of specific kinds of income, including employee compensation, at the state level. The 2011 BEA income data in general, and the compensation data especially, show once again that there is a strong negative correlation between compulsory unionism and economic growth. Overall, private-sector employee compensation (including wages, salaries, benefits and bonuses) grew by 6.4% nationwide over the past decade, after adjusting for inflation. Historically speaking, this was slow growth. However, states that protect employees from being fired for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union typically fared far better than the rest. (From 2001 to 2011, 22 states had Right to Work laws prohibiting forced union dues on the books. Last month Indiana became the 23rd Right to Work state.) A review of how compensation and jobs grew (or failed to grow) in each state suggests the U.S. Congress could dramatically improve America's economic prospects for the next decade by repealing forced union dues and fees nationwide. Current federal law authorizes and promotes the payment of compulsory union dues and fees as condition of getting or keeping a job. Right to Work States' 2001-2011 Compensation Increase Nearly Double the National Average
Right to Work Revving up Survey 2012

Right to Work Revving up Survey 2012

Pro-Forced Unionism Federal Candidates Will Have Nowhere to Hide (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) disregarded her pro-Right to Work constituents. Then voters showed her the door. Credit: Bill Clark-CQ Roll Call File Photo Federal and state disclosure reports filed by union officials and their agents show unambiguously that Big Labor controls the most massive political machine in America. In fact, just one type of report, the LM-2 forms that private-sector (and some public-sector) unions with annual revenues exceeding $250,000 are required to file with the federal government, shows that Big Labor pours over a billion dollars into politics and lobbying in every federal campaign cycle. For example, LM-2's for the years 2009 and 2010 show that unions filing such forms spent a total of $1.14 billion in forced dues-funded union treasury money on "political activities and lobbying" in the 2010 election cycle alone. A recent National Institute for Labor Relations Research analysis of data from LM-2's and other federal and state reports conservatively concluded that the union machine spent a total of $1.4 billion on federal and state politics and lobbying in 2009 and 2010. Candidate Survey Is 'One of the Committee's Most Effective Tools'
Government Union Bosses Challenged in Arizona

Government Union Bosses Challenged in Arizona

But Big Labor-Appeasing GOP Legislators May Block Reform Measures (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) Arizona has had a Right to Work law on the books for over six decades. And it has no statewide statute handing union officials monopoly-bargaining privileges over state and local government employees. Nevertheless, today many government union bosses in Arizona enjoy special privileges you might expect to find only in notorious Big Labor stronghold states like neighboring California. For example, in Phoenix, as columnist George Will pointed out last month, taxpayers fork over $900,000 annually to pay for the compensation of police union officials as they "work exclusively performing undefined union business, including lobbying . . . ." Mr. Will, citing the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute, added that all six of the top officers of the union "derive full pay and benefits from the city, although each is assigned full time to the union -- and each is also entitled to 160 hours of annual extra-pay overtime." So-Called 'Meet-and-Confer' Schemes: Monopoly Bargaining in Disguise
Tim Kaine: "Friend of Labor Bosses"

Tim Kaine: "Friend of Labor Bosses"

Virginia is a battleground state for the presidency and for control of the US Senate this year. Former GOP Senator and Right to Work champion George Allen is running against former Obama's handpicked Democratic National Committee Chairman and while  Virginia governor and Tim Kaine. Kaine claims to support the state's Right to Work law, but does not support a national Right to Work law. The Richmond Times Dispatch noticed how President Obama in a speech deriding Right to Work called Tim Kaine a "friend of labor." "Friend of labor" is a euphemism for "friends of the union bosses." American workers who have 'friends' like these, who needs enemies: In a recent speech calling Tim Kaine a "friend of labor," President Barack Obama took a swipe at states — including Virginia — that have right-to-work laws. Not surprisingly, he misrepresented not only the laws but the facts. The president says right-to-work laws are an attempt to "take collective bargaining rights away." No, they aren't. Unions can still bargain collectively in right-to-work states. What they can't do is make union membership a condition of employment. The president also said he likes to call right-to-work "right-to-work-for-less laws." Good one. But studies about wages in right-to-work versus non-right-to-work states differ; some say they're higher, others say they're lower. And others note that both economic output and wages have risen faster in right-to-work states.
Tim Kaine:

Tim Kaine: "Friend of Labor Bosses"

Virginia is a battleground state for the presidency and for control of the US Senate this year. Former GOP Senator and Right to Work champion George Allen is running against former Obama's handpicked Democratic National Committee Chairman and while  Virginia governor and Tim Kaine. Kaine claims to support the state's Right to Work law, but does not support a national Right to Work law. The Richmond Times Dispatch noticed how President Obama in a speech deriding Right to Work called Tim Kaine a "friend of labor." "Friend of labor" is a euphemism for "friends of the union bosses." American workers who have 'friends' like these, who needs enemies: In a recent speech calling Tim Kaine a "friend of labor," President Barack Obama took a swipe at states — including Virginia — that have right-to-work laws. Not surprisingly, he misrepresented not only the laws but the facts. The president says right-to-work laws are an attempt to "take collective bargaining rights away." No, they aren't. Unions can still bargain collectively in right-to-work states. What they can't do is make union membership a condition of employment. The president also said he likes to call right-to-work "right-to-work-for-less laws." Good one. But studies about wages in right-to-work versus non-right-to-work states differ; some say they're higher, others say they're lower. And others note that both economic output and wages have risen faster in right-to-work states.
Will Congress End Union Thugs' Free Ride?

Will Congress End Union Thugs' Free Ride?

International longshore union President Bob McEllrath has publicly encouraged lawlessness by his militant followers in Washington State. For example, last September 7 he participated in an illegal blockade of grain terminal deliveries. Credit: Dawn Des Brisay-Longshore Shipping News Freedom From Union Violence Act Would Close 'Lethal Loophole' (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) This month, pro-Right to Work U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) will introduce an important legal reform known as the Freedom from Union Violence Act. This bill would hold union officials who plan, commit, or foment extortionate violence against a firm's employees or owners to the same standard as business rivals, gangsters, or anyone else who does the same. Legislation Would Bar Use Of Violence as a Union 'Organizing Tool' Parallel legislation was introduced in the U.S. House earlier this year as H.R.4074 by Congressman Paul Broun (R-Ga.). Like Mr. Lee, Mr. Broun is one of the most outspoken opponents of compulsory unionism in Congress today. If H.R.4074 is enacted, power-hungry, win-at-any-cost Big Labor barons will no longer be able, without fear of federal prosecution, to resort to violence as a union "organizing" or "bargaining" tool. Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee, vowed over the course of the next few months to mobilize hundreds of thousands of members and other citizens to contact their federal elected officials and express their strong support for this legislation. It's 'Extraordinarily Difficult' to Prosecute Union Lawbreakers Mr. Mix explained: "In today's America, prosecutions of Big Labor arson, assaults, death threats, and other serious crimes are extraordinarily difficult. "Such prosecutions are frequently hindered because of a loophole in federal law that exempts extortionate violence from prosecution when it is committed pursuant to so-called 'legitimate union objectives.'
Will Congress End Union Thugs' Free Ride?

Will Congress End Union Thugs' Free Ride?

International longshore union President Bob McEllrath has publicly encouraged lawlessness by his militant followers in Washington State. For example, last September 7 he participated in an illegal blockade of grain terminal deliveries. Credit: Dawn Des Brisay-Longshore Shipping News Freedom From Union Violence Act Would Close 'Lethal Loophole' (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) This month, pro-Right to Work U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) will introduce an important legal reform known as the Freedom from Union Violence Act. This bill would hold union officials who plan, commit, or foment extortionate violence against a firm's employees or owners to the same standard as business rivals, gangsters, or anyone else who does the same. Legislation Would Bar Use Of Violence as a Union 'Organizing Tool' Parallel legislation was introduced in the U.S. House earlier this year as H.R.4074 by Congressman Paul Broun (R-Ga.). Like Mr. Lee, Mr. Broun is one of the most outspoken opponents of compulsory unionism in Congress today. If H.R.4074 is enacted, power-hungry, win-at-any-cost Big Labor barons will no longer be able, without fear of federal prosecution, to resort to violence as a union "organizing" or "bargaining" tool. Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee, vowed over the course of the next few months to mobilize hundreds of thousands of members and other citizens to contact their federal elected officials and express their strong support for this legislation. It's 'Extraordinarily Difficult' to Prosecute Union Lawbreakers Mr. Mix explained: "In today's America, prosecutions of Big Labor arson, assaults, death threats, and other serious crimes are extraordinarily difficult. "Such prosecutions are frequently hindered because of a loophole in federal law that exempts extortionate violence from prosecution when it is committed pursuant to so-called 'legitimate union objectives.'