Bills that would make Michigan the 24th state to adopt a right-to-work law have passed the Michigan Senate and House, both in Republican hands. If the bills are reconciled, as seems likely, the legislation will be signed by the Republican governor.
This is a remarkable event. Michigan is the fifth-most unionized state in the country, with 19.2 percent of the workforce. The United Auto Workers, born in Michigan, has been a major player in state politics for decades.
But the Michigan economy is doing very poorly, relative to the country as a whole, with unemployment at 9.1 percent. Only five states are doing worse. The state’s biggest city, Detroit, is a poster child for urban decay, on the brink of bankruptcy thanks to decades of spectacularly corrupt government and unaffordable pension agreements with its unionized workers.
Right-to-work states have been overwhelmingly concentrated in the South, the mountain West, and the northern plain states. But this year Indiana became the first state in the Midwest industrial heartland to adopt a right-to-work law. Should Michigan do so as well, it will be a powerful indication that union power is in serious and probably permanent decline. No longer obliged to belong to a union in order to work at a unionized company or government, many workers will simply stop paying the substantial dues unions charge. And since, as California’s Jesse Unruh explained decades ago, “money is the mother’s milk of politics,” that means union political power will diminish accordingly.
Good!! It's about time and long overdue. Hopefully, the wave will continue to spread out across the country. No one should be forced to join a union in order to obtain a job.
LOL boomer, you took the words right out of my mouth! I live in Michigan and I'm very proud of my Tea Party friends who worked on getting this passed.
Good for you then!! Perhaps now, more companies will consider your state as a place to do business in and subsequently improve the economy. Until this country becomes totally socialist and the government takes total control and nationalizes everything, companies will continue to seek states and/or countries to do business in that will improve their bottom lines. That's the way free enterprise works as the workers at Hostess found out the hard way. If a worker wants a good job that pays a "living wage", then they need to develope a skill or obtain an education that warrants one. Pushing a broom or hanging mirrors on a car door does not exactly fit that description.
Good for Michigan. I wish my home state of Montana would do the same thing, and I am in the Steelworkers' Union. Our pathetic union is just a rubber stamp for Democrats, and we get absolutely no say in the process.
What's bad for the unions is good for the country. What's good for the unions is bad for the country. Right-to-Work states seem to recognize this principle and they will benefit accordingly.
STICK IT TO THE UNIONS, ESPECIALLY THE UAW! n nWhat's bad for the unions, ESPECIALLY THE UAW is good for the country. What's good for the unions ESPECIALLY THE UAW is bad for the country.
Apparently there are some pretty smart people who read Commentary. You are all correct, whatever is bad for the UAW is good for America.
If a union (such as the one I belong to) is in a "right to work" environment (as mine is) and has a high percentage of voluntary dues-paying members (as does my chapter), it's because the union does an excellent job of representing employees. n nThat gets to the core of union opposition to "Right To Work" laws. Under those laws, unions don't have the right to mechanically HARVEST dues from everyone, without the slightest regard to the level of service they provide. They are unaccustomed to the idea of having to EARN their power (derived from dues money). n nYou don't get money if you don't perform. That's FAIR. We're looking for "fair," aren't we??
Please u think it just about the unions just wait until your wages fall and u are fired for less qualified and less paid personell