Job Losses Increase Pressure For Reform

Job Losses Increase Pressure For Reform

(Source: August 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Grass-Roots Right to Work Efforts Expanding in Midwestern States Pro-forced unionism politicians like Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D-Mich., shown here with former Vice President Gore and President Obama) have lost credibility due to the extraordinarily poor economic performance of forced-unionism states. Credit: Radiospike.com All across America, Right to Work states have long benefited from economic growth far superior to that of states in which millions of employees are forced to join or pay dues or fees to a labor union just to keep their jobs. But over the past decade, the contrast between Right to Work states and forced-union-dues states has been especially stark in the Midwest. Four Midwestern forced-unionism states -- Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and Indiana -- suffered absolute private-sector job declines over the past decade that were worse than those of any of the other 46 states. Midwestern forced-unionism states (the four just mentioned, plus Missouri, Wisconsin and Minnesota) lost a net total of 1.88 million private-sector jobs. Combined, these seven forced-unionism states had 8.1% fewer private-sector jobs in 2009 than they did back in 1999. Meanwhile, the five Midwestern Right to Work states (North Dakota, Nebraska, South Dakota, Iowa and Kansas) experienced an overall private-sector job increase of 2.3%. Moreover, from 1999 to 2009, real personal income in Midwestern Right to Work states grew by 17.3% -- an increase two-and-a-half times as a great as the combined real personal income growth in Midwestern forced-unionism states. State Right to Work laws prohibit the firing of employees simply for exercising their right to refuse to join or bankroll an unwanted union. At this time, 22 states have Right to Work laws on the books. However, because of intensifying grass-roots efforts in many of the remaining 28 forced-unionism states, the number of Right to Work states could be on the rise over the course of the next few years. Recession's End Won't Suffice to Revive Big Labor-Controlled States

'Mandatory Union Membership' Is PLA's Purpose

'Mandatory Union Membership' Is PLA's Purpose

Committee President Mark Mix: The Right to Work movement and its allies are challenging President Obama’s 2009 executive order promoting union-only "project labor agreements" on federal taxpayer-funded public works. (Source: June 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Ohio Town Council Cuts Through Big Labor/White House Fog  Marietta, which has only about 15,000 residents, but enjoys a place of honor as the oldest city of any size in Ohio, is located more than 230 miles outside the Washington, D.C., Beltway.  And from the vantage point of Marietta's community building at Lookout Park, where the town council considered adoption of a so-called "project labor agreement" (PLA) on May 13, it appears to be far easier to see and state the obvious than it is at the White House or on Capitol Hill.  This spring, building trades union bosses lobbied furiously to convince the council's seven members to impose a Big Labor PLA on employees and firms seeking to participate in the renovation of the town's former Ohio Bureau of Employment Services building into a new municipal court facility.  Parkersburg Marietta Construction and Building Trades Council union President Bill Hutchinson claimed, time and again, that the reason he and his cohorts were twisting arms to get a PLA was to ensure that "local" workers got the jobs.  Finally, at the council's May 13 meeting, Councilman Jon Grimm decided to test building trades union bosses' sincerity.  Mr. Grimm called attention to the provision in the PLA mandating that 50% of any contractor's employees be registered with the union and pay union dues, even if they weren't union members, and didn't want to join.

'Mandatory Union Membership' Is PLA's Purpose

'Mandatory Union Membership' Is PLA's Purpose

Committee President Mark Mix: The Right to Work movement and its allies are challenging President Obama’s 2009 executive order promoting union-only "project labor agreements" on federal taxpayer-funded public works. (Source: June 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Ohio Town Council Cuts Through Big Labor/White House Fog  Marietta, which has only about 15,000 residents, but enjoys a place of honor as the oldest city of any size in Ohio, is located more than 230 miles outside the Washington, D.C., Beltway.  And from the vantage point of Marietta's community building at Lookout Park, where the town council considered adoption of a so-called "project labor agreement" (PLA) on May 13, it appears to be far easier to see and state the obvious than it is at the White House or on Capitol Hill.  This spring, building trades union bosses lobbied furiously to convince the council's seven members to impose a Big Labor PLA on employees and firms seeking to participate in the renovation of the town's former Ohio Bureau of Employment Services building into a new municipal court facility.  Parkersburg Marietta Construction and Building Trades Council union President Bill Hutchinson claimed, time and again, that the reason he and his cohorts were twisting arms to get a PLA was to ensure that "local" workers got the jobs.  Finally, at the council's May 13 meeting, Councilman Jon Grimm decided to test building trades union bosses' sincerity.  Mr. Grimm called attention to the provision in the PLA mandating that 50% of any contractor's employees be registered with the union and pay union dues, even if they weren't union members, and didn't want to join.

Right to Work Revving Up Survey 2010

Right to Work Revving Up Survey 2010

Pro-Forced Unionism Federal Candidates Will Have Nowhere to Hide (Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Federal reports show that, in 2007 and 2008, Big Labor PACs directly contributed $73 million to federal candidates. And Big Labor-operated Section 527 groups spent an additional $57 million on an array of get-out-the-vote efforts for pro-forced unionism candidates. These two types of political spending officially acknowledged by union bosses add up to $130 million in the 2007-2008 campaign cycle. That's no mean sum. But Big Labor's officially acknowledged campaign expenditures represent only the tip of the iceberg of union electioneering, as union insiders like Jon Tasini, a former union official who now heads the New York-based Labor Research Association, have acknowledged again and again. In a February 20, 2005 op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Mr. Tasini reported that several "union political experts" had admitted to him that "unions spend seven to 10 times what they give candidates and [campaign organizations] on internal political mobilization." "Following Jon Tasini's formula, in the 2007-2008 campaign cycle, Organized Labor spent between $900 million and $1.3 billion, mostly forced-dues money, on 'internal political mobilization,'" noted Matthew Leen, vice president of the National Right to Work Committee. Candidate Survey Is 'One of the Committee's Most Effective Tools' "Forced-dues money pays for political phone banks, propaganda mailings, and the salaries and benefits for tens of thousands of campaign 'volunteers,'" Mr. Leen continued. "And the Wall Street Journal reported last month that the AFL-CIO hierarchy 'plans to roll out its biggest political campaign ever' in 2010." To meet union bigwigs' challenge, the National Right to Work Committee has launched its federal candidate Survey 2010.