“Right to Work” and “Ready to Work” in Iowa

“Right to Work” and “Ready to Work” in Iowa

In the May issue of Inside ALEC, Iowa State Rep. Dawn Pettengill explains the importance of Right To Work and state economic growth: Through an executive order in July of 2000, Iowa’s Governor [Tom] Vilsack ordered the removal of all Right to Work references from the Department of Economic Development (IDED) website and brochures. [Vilsack is Barack Obama’s current Secretary of Agriculture.] Eleven years later, HF149 sailed through the Iowa House requiring IDED to include the phrase, “Iowa is a Right-to- Work State” in BOLD letters on all business recruitment and promotional literature and their website. Today, although the bill stalled in the Senate, the Iowa Department of Economic Development’s webpage “Why Iowa?” proudly announces Iowa as a Right to Work state. The “Business Advantages” page showcases Iowa’s Right to Work at the top of the list of reasons for a business to bring their commerce to our state. Whether you are a business or an individual, the rights of workers and employers are every bit as important as tax implications, a skilled workforce and a great quality of life when making that location decision. According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, Right To Work (RTW) states benefit from faster growth and higher purchasing power than non- Right To Work. Their November 2010 report shows significantly higher percentages in the growth of nonfarm private sector employees, real manufacturing GDP, real personal income, disposable personal income, value added per production worker, housing starts, the number of bachelor degrees attained and people covered by employment based and private health insurance.
Keeping Missouri Competitive with “Right to Work”

Keeping Missouri Competitive with “Right to Work”

Missouri Senator Ron Richard wants Right To Work to help put Missourians back to work. Unfortunately, Big Labor Democrat Governor Jay Nixon seems more focused on getting President Obama’s job renewed than growing Missouri jobs. From Sen. Richard’s Op-Ed in the May 2011 issue of Inside ALEC: From the first day of the legislative session, my colleagues and I in the Missouri Senate sent a clear message that our main goal during the session is putting Missourians back to work. With 9.4 percent or more than 200,000 of workers in our state unemployed, we are willing to explore a variety of ways to stimulate job growth and attract businesses to the state.  One of these proposals is making Missouri a Right to Work state. This legislation would increase our state’s economic attractiveness and give employees the choice of whether or not to join a union. Simply put, the legislation makes sure that Missouri employees only join a union and pay dues if they want to, rather than as a condition of getting or keeping a job. During a Senate hearing on the bill, the committee room was packed with those wanting to testify on the issue. One of the most interesting pieces of testimony was from a site selection consultant who said that 75 percent of the manufacturers he works with prefer to be in a Right to Work state, with half of his clients refusing to consider forced union states as a future location.
Trumka's Tirade

Trumka's Tirade

AFL-CIO boss Dick Trumka speech where he issued the hollow threat to the Democrat Party to take his fidelity elsewhere, is being called Trumka's Tirade by the Pittsburgh Tribune: Big Labor boss Richard Trumka has issued an ultimatum to unions' lackeys in Congress: Meet our unrelenting demands or find another sugar daddy to fund your campaigns next year. "We will spend the summer holding elected leaders in Congress as well as the states accountable on one measure: Are they improving or degrading life for working families (of union members)?" says the AFL-CIO's Mr. Trumka. And Trumka says Democrats may be "controlling the wrecking ball" that's hurting unions. How's that for gratitude? Whereas unions, given their substantial contributions to Democrats in the last presidential election, didn't get everything on their quite lengthy wish list, they've made substantial inroads with Team Obama at the federal level. Those inroads lead to the National Labor Relations Board.
Trumka's Tirade

Trumka's Tirade

AFL-CIO boss Dick Trumka speech where he issued the hollow threat to the Democrat Party to take his fidelity elsewhere, is being called Trumka's Tirade by the Pittsburgh Tribune: Big Labor boss Richard Trumka has issued an ultimatum to unions' lackeys in Congress: Meet our unrelenting demands or find another sugar daddy to fund your campaigns next year. "We will spend the summer holding elected leaders in Congress as well as the states accountable on one measure: Are they improving or degrading life for working families (of union members)?" says the AFL-CIO's Mr. Trumka. And Trumka says Democrats may be "controlling the wrecking ball" that's hurting unions. How's that for gratitude? Whereas unions, given their substantial contributions to Democrats in the last presidential election, didn't get everything on their quite lengthy wish list, they've made substantial inroads with Team Obama at the federal level. Those inroads lead to the National Labor Relations Board.
Finally, Someone Takes on the Obama Administration's Big Labor Paybacks in Court

Finally, Someone Takes on the Obama Administration's Big Labor Paybacks in Court

The National Right To Work Legal Defense News Release (5/24/2011): Union Member Seeks to Block Obama Labor Department’s Efforts to Roll Back Union Disclosure Rules Department guts disclosure rule that has exposed numerous corrupt union boss schemes and let rank-and-file members know how dues are spent Washington, DC (May 23, 2011) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a Maryland county government employee is asking a federal court to stop the Obama Administration from allowing union bosses to conceal lavish and corrupt union expenditures from workers. Chris Mosquera, a member of a Municipal County Government Employee Local of the United Food and Commercial Worker (UFCW) union, filed the lawsuit against Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for rescinding a union boss disclosure rule which would make it less difficult for workers to hold union officials accountable. Unions covered by the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) with total annual receipts of $250,000 or more are currently required to submit annual financial statements to the U.S. Department of Labor. LM-2 forms are the public disclosure documents for these larger unions and are available online on the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) website. These forms have helped workers and citizen activists expose many unscrupulous union boss schemes, including lavish benefits to high-ranking union officials and loyalists, superfluous spending on union boss transportation (including private jets), and shady political spending (such as the Service Employees International Union bosses’ links to the disgraced political organization ACORN). Mosquera seeks to intervene for the millions of workers who are forced by federal mandate to accept union boss “representation” and pay union dues or fees to a union in order to get or keep their jobs. The lawsuit alleges that Solis exceeded her power as Secretary of Labor by repealing a January 2009 LM-2 Final Rule because the rule put a “burden” on union officials to report their expenditures to the public. However, under federal law, Solis cannot use “burden” as a justification for rescission of a rule. Solis further overstepped her legal authority by singlehandedly creating a new rule that allows union bosses to more easily evade and circumvent the LMRDA.
Finally, Someone Takes on the Obama Administration's Big Labor Paybacks in Court

Finally, Someone Takes on the Obama Administration's Big Labor Paybacks in Court

The National Right To Work Legal Defense News Release (5/24/2011): Union Member Seeks to Block Obama Labor Department’s Efforts to Roll Back Union Disclosure Rules Department guts disclosure rule that has exposed numerous corrupt union boss schemes and let rank-and-file members know how dues are spent Washington, DC (May 23, 2011) – With free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a Maryland county government employee is asking a federal court to stop the Obama Administration from allowing union bosses to conceal lavish and corrupt union expenditures from workers. Chris Mosquera, a member of a Municipal County Government Employee Local of the United Food and Commercial Worker (UFCW) union, filed the lawsuit against Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for rescinding a union boss disclosure rule which would make it less difficult for workers to hold union officials accountable. Unions covered by the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) with total annual receipts of $250,000 or more are currently required to submit annual financial statements to the U.S. Department of Labor. LM-2 forms are the public disclosure documents for these larger unions and are available online on the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) website. These forms have helped workers and citizen activists expose many unscrupulous union boss schemes, including lavish benefits to high-ranking union officials and loyalists, superfluous spending on union boss transportation (including private jets), and shady political spending (such as the Service Employees International Union bosses’ links to the disgraced political organization ACORN). Mosquera seeks to intervene for the millions of workers who are forced by federal mandate to accept union boss “representation” and pay union dues or fees to a union in order to get or keep their jobs. The lawsuit alleges that Solis exceeded her power as Secretary of Labor by repealing a January 2009 LM-2 Final Rule because the rule put a “burden” on union officials to report their expenditures to the public. However, under federal law, Solis cannot use “burden” as a justification for rescission of a rule. Solis further overstepped her legal authority by singlehandedly creating a new rule that allows union bosses to more easily evade and circumvent the LMRDA.