January 2013 National Right To Work Committee Newsletter Available Online
Click here to download a copy Michigan Passes State Right to Work Law — If Forced-Unionism Foes Can Do It There, They Can Do It…
October 2012 National Right To Work Committee Newsletter Available Online
Click here to download a copy Romney Team Should Boost Forced-Unionism Issue — Freedom to Work Without Supporting a Union Hangs in the Balance Right…
August 2012 The National Right To Work Committee e-Newsletter available
The August 2012 issue of The National Right to Work Committee Newsletter is available for download for your convenience to read and share. It is…
July 2012 National Right To Work Committee Newsletter Available Online
Click here to download a copy Wisconsin Voters Rebuff Government Union Brass — Vote ‘Opens the Door’ For Right to Work Efforts in Other States…
June 2012 National Right To Work Committee Newsletter Available Online
Click here to download a copy More ‘Raspberries’ For Compulsory Union Dues — Employees Have Multiple Reasons to Run to Right to…
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'
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
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'
Will Big Labor Get Its Revenge in Wisconsin?
Union Bosses Plot to Recover All of Their Forced-Dues Privileges (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) Early last year, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) infuriated the union hierarchy, in his own state and nationwide, when he introduced legislation (S.B.11) that would abolish forced union dues for teachers and many other public employees and also sharply limit the scope of government union monopoly bargaining. In response, teacher union bosses in Madison, Milwaukee, and other cities called teachers out on illegal strikes so they could stage angry protests at the state capitol and at legislators' residences. Government union militants issued dozens of death threats against Mr. Walker, his administration, and their families. Fourteen Big Labor-backed state senators, all Democrats, temporarily fled the state to deny the pro-S.B.11 Senate majority a quorum to pass the bill. But thanks in part to public support mobilized by the National Right to Work Committee's e-mail and telecommunications activities, pro-Right to Work legislators were able to withstand the Big Labor fury. Ultimately, S.B.11 was sent to Gov. Walker's desk, and on March 11, 2011, he signed into law the measure now known as Act 10. '[T]o Get Things Out of the Contract and Make Needed Changes Was Impossible'
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
New Book Plugs One-Sided 'Right' to Unionize
In a just-published book, Big Labor academic Richard Kahlenberg and union lawyer Moshe Marvit (inset) advocate full protection for the right to join a union, but only nominal protection for the right not to join. Credit: The Century Foundation Carnegie Mellon University Big Labor Academics Oppose Equal Protection For Right Not to Join (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the principal federal law regulating employee-employer relations in America's private sector, purports to uphold the right to "form, join or assist labor organizations" and also "the right to refrain from" forming, joining or assisting such organizations. But the NLRA fails utterly to give equal protection to workers who don't want a union. For example, under the NLRA as interpreted by the courts, workers have only a nominal right not to join. As nonmembers, they don't have the right to refuse to pay dues or fees to a union, and still keep their jobs, whenever union officials can obtain "exclusive" bargaining privileges. On the other hand, the NLRA fully protects the freedom of employees who want a union to join and pay dues; it doesn't matter at all if their employer and the majority of their fellow employees oppose unionization. Pro-union employees cannot legally be fired or otherwise discriminated against for joining or financially supporting a union under any circumstances. 'True Civil Rights Are Two-Way Streets'
New Book Plugs One-Sided 'Right' to Unionize
In a just-published book, Big Labor academic Richard Kahlenberg and union lawyer Moshe Marvit (inset) advocate full protection for the right to join a union, but only nominal protection for the right not to join. Credit: The Century Foundation Carnegie Mellon University Big Labor Academics Oppose Equal Protection For Right Not to Join (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the principal federal law regulating employee-employer relations in America's private sector, purports to uphold the right to "form, join or assist labor organizations" and also "the right to refrain from" forming, joining or assisting such organizations. But the NLRA fails utterly to give equal protection to workers who don't want a union. For example, under the NLRA as interpreted by the courts, workers have only a nominal right not to join. As nonmembers, they don't have the right to refuse to pay dues or fees to a union, and still keep their jobs, whenever union officials can obtain "exclusive" bargaining privileges. On the other hand, the NLRA fully protects the freedom of employees who want a union to join and pay dues; it doesn't matter at all if their employer and the majority of their fellow employees oppose unionization. Pro-union employees cannot legally be fired or otherwise discriminated against for joining or financially supporting a union under any circumstances. 'True Civil Rights Are Two-Way Streets'
May 2012 National Right To Work Committee Newsletter Available Online
Click here to download a copy Senate Green-Lights NLRB ‘Card-Check’ Scheme — Big Labor Senators Let Obama Bureaucrats Do Their Dirty Work Did Top NLRB Lawyer Violate Ethics Rules? — Inspector General Asked to Investigate Ex Parte…
Special Newsletter Supplement -- Victory in Indiana: A 'Turning Point'?
March National Right to Work Committee newsletter Special Supplement online Here’s a quote: Abby Rapoport, a staff writer for the pro-forced unionism American Prospect, fears the…
Special Newsletter Supplement -- Victory in Indiana: A 'Turning Point'?
March National Right to Work Committee newsletter Special Supplement online Here’s a quote: Abby Rapoport, a staff writer for the pro-forced unionism American Prospect, fears the…
April 2012 The National Right To Work Committee e-Newsletter available
The April 2012 issue of The National Right to Work Committee Newsletter is available for download for your convenience to read and share. It is…
Right to Work Battles to Rein in Obama NLRB
Mark Mix: President Barack Obama is jeopardizing the very constitutional balance of the United States in order to pay off his union benefactors. But Right to Work officers and supporters are fighting back. Credit: Fox News Legislative Challenge to 'Ambush' Election Scheme Now Pending (source: National Right To Work Committee March 2012 Newsletter) On Capitol Hill, in federal court, and at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Right to Work proponents are now helping spearhead efforts to stop the Obama Administration and Big Labor from dragooning hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of additional workers into forced-dues-paying ranks every year. President Barack Obama instigated his latest showdown with Right to Work proponents on January 4, when he installed three new members on the five-member NLRB through "recess appointments," despite the fact that the U.S. Senate was manifestly not in recess. "The phony 'recess' appointments to the NLRB that President Obama made at the beginning of this year illegally circumvented at least two sections of the U.S. Constitution," charged National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix. "First, Article II, Section 2 grants to the chief executive the power to appoint 'officers of the United States,' but only 'by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.' "The Constitution makes it clear that only in cases when 'vacancies happen during recesses of the Senate' may the President make temporary 'recess' appointments to offices that normally require confirmation by Congress's upper chamber." President Claims Constitutional Definition of 'Recess' Can't Be Used to Limit His Power "Second, Mr. Obama and his Justice Department have attempted to justify his so-called 'recess' appointments by effectively asserting that it is the President's prerogative to declare that the Senate is in recess at any moment when the chamber is not actually conducting business," Mr. Mix continued. "But the constitutional definition of 'recess' in Article I, Section 5 contradicts this theory. That's why the White House is now contending this provision can't be used to restrict the President's appointment power."
March 2012 issue of The National Right To Work Committee Newsletter is available
The March 2012 issue of The National Right to Work Committee Newsletter is available for download March 2012 Newsletter in an Adobe pdf format for your convenience…