Investors Business Daily looks at the thriving American Auto Industry — no not the one in excessively-taxed and forced-unionism dominated Michigan but the lower-taxed Right to Work Tennessee: President Obama triumphantly told the United Auto Workers last month that…
From the Heritage Foundation an endorsement of Right To Work Freedoms for Michigan: Did you know that there are no Volkswagen manufacturing plants in the Detroit area? Or Mercedes-Benz? Or Kia? Or Hyundai? Or BMW, for that matter? Apart from having their cars assembled in Michigan, it turns out that those three companies have something else in common: the United Auto Workers union (UAW). It also turns out that every other car manufacturer has something in common, too: not wanting the UAW to do to them what it did to the Big Three. Today, President Obama will address the UAW, and he should receive a rousing welcome. After all, his terms of the auto bailout richly rewarded his union allies at the expense of non-union employees and private investors, giving them, among other prizes, a very large stake of ownership in Chrysler. And together, they stand adamantly opposed to "right-to-work" laws that would empower the nation's unemployed to find economic security with a non-union job. They claim they want to protect "the American auto industry," but this is not about "American cars." The controlling interest of Chrysler is Italy-based Fiat and previously was Germany's Daimler-Benz between 1997 and 2008. This is simply about protecting union fortunes. Chrysler can hire actors in Louisiana to play the part of Detroit workers, and it can produce cinematically brilliant television ads. But wouldn't Detroiters have more pride in a job than a commercial? Chrysler and the UAW must drop its opposition to Michigan's right-to-work legislation if it wants to pretend it cares. Right-to-work legislation protects employees from being fired for not paying union dues. Without that protection, workers are forced to support a union financially even if they'd rather spend their hard earned dollars at home, if the union contract harms them, or if they're opposed to the union's agenda. And if they don't, they lose their jobs. Obviously, when given the freedom of choice, many workers choose not to unionize.
It appears efforts to provide teacher’s with the ability to choose or not to choose to join a union has resulted in a remarkable 200,000 teachers deciding not to rejoin their union. The Education Action…
[stream provider=youtube flv=w4TkzWcGTxo img=x:/nrtwc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/TerryMoeCEAFU.png embed=false share=false width=580 height=280 dock=true controlbar=over bandwidth=high autostart=false /] Dr. Moe: As long as monopolistic teacher unions "remain powerful," effective schools "will be short-changed." Stanford Professor Lambastes Monopolistic Teacher Unionism (Source: July 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) On June 1, Tennessee achieved a legislative milestone when its elected officials effectively repealed a 33-year-old state statute authorizing and promoting union monopoly-bargaining control over teachers and other K-12 public school instructional employees. Under the new K-12 reform law approved by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Bill Haslam (R ), no union or other organization will be handed a legally protected monopoly over all "employee" input in discussions with school boards over working conditions. Once this law, known as the Collaborative Conferencing Act, takes effect, teachers who choose not to join any union will, for the first time in decades, have a voice in discussions throughout Tennessee regarding salaries, benefits and grievances. Tennessee revoked teacher union bosses' monopoly-bargaining privileges last month largely thanks to persistent lobbying by the roughly 46,000 National Right to Work Committee members and supporters in the Volunteer State. And, according to Stanford University political scientist and education specialist Terry Moe, the Tennesseans who helped pass the Collaborative Conferencing Act have done an enormous favor for their state's schoolchildren. From Children's Standpoint, Union Boss-Perpetuated Salary Rules 'Make No Sense at All' In his new book Special Interest: Teachers Unions and America's Public Schools (Brookings Institution Press), Dr. Moe documents how teacher union monopoly bargaining, still statutorily enshrined in more than 30 states, impairs school outcomes while sharply raising the cost to taxpayers. In practice, charges Dr. Moe, "exclusive" union bargaining routinely produces "key decisions that depart from -- and are systematically biased against -- what is best for kids and effective organization." One example among many are so-called "single salary schedules" that furnish teachers with extra pay for additional degrees and course taking, even though "research has consistently shown" that simply accumulating degrees and/or additional course credits, "does not make teachers more effective." From "the standpoint of what is best for children," such Big Labor-perpetuated salary rules "make no sense at all" (emphasis Dr. Moe's). But teacher union officials ferociously defend "single salary schedule" rules, because they keep educators dependent on the union for securing better pay and career advancement. Monopolistic Unionism Can Never Be 'Reform Unionism' In today's America, Special Interest goes on to point out, many education policymakers and other leaders "recognize that teacher unions are standing in the way of effective schools," but mistakenly believe that union officials "can be persuaded to do good things with their [monopolistic] power." This is the false hope of what is commonly called "reform unionism."
[stream provider=youtube flv=w4TkzWcGTxo img=x:/nrtwc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/TerryMoeCEAFU.png embed=false share=false width=580 height=280 dock=true controlbar=over bandwidth=high autostart=false /] Dr. Moe: As long as monopolistic teacher unions "remain powerful," effective schools "will be short-changed." Stanford Professor Lambastes Monopolistic Teacher Unionism (Source: July 2011 NRTWC Newsletter) On June 1, Tennessee achieved a legislative milestone when its elected officials effectively repealed a 33-year-old state statute authorizing and promoting union monopoly-bargaining control over teachers and other K-12 public school instructional employees. Under the new K-12 reform law approved by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Bill Haslam (R ), no union or other organization will be handed a legally protected monopoly over all "employee" input in discussions with school boards over working conditions. Once this law, known as the Collaborative Conferencing Act, takes effect, teachers who choose not to join any union will, for the first time in decades, have a voice in discussions throughout Tennessee regarding salaries, benefits and grievances. Tennessee revoked teacher union bosses' monopoly-bargaining privileges last month largely thanks to persistent lobbying by the roughly 46,000 National Right to Work Committee members and supporters in the Volunteer State. And, according to Stanford University political scientist and education specialist Terry Moe, the Tennesseans who helped pass the Collaborative Conferencing Act have done an enormous favor for their state's schoolchildren. From Children's Standpoint, Union Boss-Perpetuated Salary Rules 'Make No Sense at All' In his new book Special Interest: Teachers Unions and America's Public Schools (Brookings Institution Press), Dr. Moe documents how teacher union monopoly bargaining, still statutorily enshrined in more than 30 states, impairs school outcomes while sharply raising the cost to taxpayers. In practice, charges Dr. Moe, "exclusive" union bargaining routinely produces "key decisions that depart from -- and are systematically biased against -- what is best for kids and effective organization." One example among many are so-called "single salary schedules" that furnish teachers with extra pay for additional degrees and course taking, even though "research has consistently shown" that simply accumulating degrees and/or additional course credits, "does not make teachers more effective." From "the standpoint of what is best for children," such Big Labor-perpetuated salary rules "make no sense at all" (emphasis Dr. Moe's). But teacher union officials ferociously defend "single salary schedule" rules, because they keep educators dependent on the union for securing better pay and career advancement. Monopolistic Unionism Can Never Be 'Reform Unionism' In today's America, Special Interest goes on to point out, many education policymakers and other leaders "recognize that teacher unions are standing in the way of effective schools," but mistakenly believe that union officials "can be persuaded to do good things with their [monopolistic] power." This is the false hope of what is commonly called "reform unionism."
Enacting a Right to Work law in Kentucky would be a boon for jobs and economic prosperity -- but don't just take our word for it. The Bowling Green Daily News agrees: Gov. Steve Beshear and the Democrat-controlled House are beholden to labor unions in this state and for that reason, year after year we continue to lose companies and jobs to other Southern states because Kentucky is not a right-to-work state. Right-to-work laws protect workers’ freedoms by not forcing them to pay dues to a union upon becoming employed or throughout employment. Nearly any citizen in a right-to-work state is protected by a state’s right-to-work law. Labor unions make up less than 9 percent of Kentucky’s workforce, so it would make sense that Beshear and the House would have more concern for the majority of the workforce. Sadly, they don’t. They need the unions, who contribute millions of dollars every election year through political action committees or other ways to encourage the governor and those in the House to follow part of their agenda, which is not allowing Kentucky to become a right-to-work state. Kentucky is the only Southern state not to have a right-to-work law. For that reason, many companies don’t even consider our state when choosing plant locations. Business 101 would tell you that this is simply bad business. The governor and House are hindering our state because they ignore reality. Shame on them. It reflects poor leadership and it holds our state back when competing for jobs that could be coming to Kentucky. Simpson County Judge-Executive Jim Henderson is a strong supporter of the right-to-work concept. Henderson said on a number of occasions during the process of trying to get a company to come to Franklin, it was eliminated because of not being a right-to-work state. He said it was communicated through correspondence and other means of communication that not having a right-to-work law is why companies aren’t coming to his city.One only has to look at companies such as Nissan North America. The company admitted that one reason it decided to move its headquarters from California to Tennessee and not Kentucky was because of the lower business costs. Interestingly enough, the average Kentuckian has to work 13 months to make what an average Tennessean can in one year.
As Right to Work legislation finds its way back to the top of the legislative agenda in the state capital, Andrea Neal looks at the benefits of enacting a Right to Work bill in the Hoosier State: It doesn't take an economist to spot the common thread in these recent economic development headlines: Chattanooga, Tenn., July 29: "Volkswagen hires 2,000th employee." Shreveport, La., July 28: "NJ-based bag manufacturer to build Louisiana plant." Decatur, Ala., July 21: "Polyplex to build $185 million plant." West Point, Ga., July 7: "Kia builds vehicle No. 300,000." All four stories have Southern datelines. All come from states with right-to-work laws, which prohibit labor contracts that [force] employees to join a union or pay a union representation fee. This is the issue that prompted the five-week House Democratic walkout during the 2011 Indiana General Assembly. The Democrats -- a minority in both House and Senate -- had no other leverage. So when a right-to-work bill came up unexpectedly in a session that was supposed to be about the budget, redistricting and education, they bolted. Republicans capitulated and took the legislation off the table. In 2012, it will return with a vengeance, and this time Democrats can't avoid it. Right-to-work has been promised a full public airing. The Interim Study Committee on Employment Issues, chaired by Sen. Phil Boots, R-Crawfordsville, is taking a first crack this summer and hopes to recommend a bill by November. Gov. Mitch Daniels, who didn't support the bill last session, has hinted he might this time around.
Josh Fields, writing in the Tennessean, recognizes that the NLRB’s attack on South Carolina’s efforts to lure business with their Right to Work law is not just about South Carolina. Other states that have enacted Right to Work laws should…
Josh Fields, writing in the Tennessean, recognizes that the NLRB’s attack on South Carolina’s efforts to lure business with their Right to Work law is not just about South Carolina. Other states that have enacted Right to Work laws should…