Everyone
Benefits from the Right to Work
In an article the Star-Ledger posted on December
30, 2012, by Stephen Sweeney, President of the New Jersey Senate, it’s not
surprising he used AFL-CIO supplied information alleging a $5,538 unfavorable
differential in wages in Right-to-Work (“RTW”) States vs. non-RTW States. After all, he is the General Organizer for
the International Association of Ironworkers.
However, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (“BLS”),
private-sector, inflation-adjusted compensation in RTW States increased by 12%
between 2001 and 2011, while such compensation increased by only 3% in forced-union
dues States during the same period. See,
“Right-To-Work Lies Fall Flat In Michigan,” Investor’s Business Daily
(“IBD”) 12/12/12, p.A1. Inflation-adjusted
compensation in the RTW States was better because those states tend to attract
more quality jobs and have lower living costs.
Senator Sweeney ties RTW Laws to the tea party
movement. The right of each state to
pass a RTW Law was part of the Taft-Hartley Law, passed in 1947, long before
the tea party movement started in 2009. Twenty-four
states have passed RTW Laws. Tennessee
was one of the first states to do so, passing its law in 1947. As a result Tennessee has been attracting new
domestic and foreign businesses for years and has become a major automobile
manufacturing hub. Nissan opened its
Smyrna, Tennessee plant in 1983 and moved its US headquarters to Tennessee in
the mid-2000’s. It recently added 1,000
employees to its Smyrna plant and plans on adding 1,300 more in 2013. Toyota has a parts facility in Jackson,
Tennessee; Bridgestone Tire has its American headquarters in Nashville; and
Volkswagen opened its only US plant in Chattanooga in 2010. Even GM is reopening its old Spring Hill,
Tennessee plant. Tennessee has been mainly spared the mass layoffs, plant
closures and bailouts that affected the Detroit area. Many groups credit the fact that Tennessee is
a RTW State as the key advantage that saved it the pain that other parts of the
country suffered. Sean Higgins,
“Tennessee Auto Industry Thrives Without Unions,” IBD, 3/5/12, p. A1-A6.
Speaking of the automotive industry, you may remember that
back in the 1950’s Ford Motor Company had several assembly plants in New Jersey
and nearby Pennsylvania. However, in the
mid-fifties, Ford started shutting plants.
Ford closed the Edgewater, NJ plant in 1955, the Chester, PA plant in
1961, the Mahwah, NJ plant in 1980 and the Edison, NJ plant in 2004. It’s not that cars could not be manufactured profitably
in the United States or that the US had insufficient demand for cars, because
during this same time frame many automobile manufacturing and assembly plants
were built by Toyota, Honda, BMW, Nissan, Subaru, and Volkswagen. Toyota alone opened approximately eleven
plants from California to Pennsylvania, while the big three were closing plants
from coast to coast. However, many of
the new plants were built in RTW States, such as Tennessee, South Carolina and
Alabama.
The main thrust of Senator Sweeney’s article was, without
citations, that RTW Laws “can have devastating impacts on workers and a state’s
economy as a whole.” However, the facts
do not support his statement. There are
advantages to the RTW Laws for both employees and employers. News coverage usually leaves out the
advantages to employees of letting employees have the choice of whether or not
to join a union. A recent survey of
CEO’s ranked states in which they would like to do business on a variety of
measures. All of the states in the top
10 were RTW States. Not one of the
states in the bottom 20 was a RTW State.
In the ‘worst states for jobs’ list, New Jersey came in 45th
out of 50. For most expensive states,
New Jersey came in 5th highest, above even New York.
Economists have noted that RTW States have more labor force
flexibility, faster economic growth, higher employment, greater inward
migration, lower living costs and higher real compensation. In the ten RTW States rated the best in the
nation, private sector employment increased 10.6% from 2000 to 2010, while in the 10 compulsory-unionism States
rated the worst in the nation, which included New Jersey, employment increased
just 1.9% over the same period. It is
obvious the increase in employment and greater labor force flexibility, due to
the absence of strict union rules, together with lower cost of living in RTW
States, helps employees. RTW Laws are
win-win laws for both employees and employers.
See, “More ‘Raspberries’ For Compulsory Union Dues,” National
Right To Work Newsletter (“NRWN”), June 2012, p.1. New Jersey has suffered net outward migration
and its high taxes, high living expenses, forced-union dues and excessive
regulations are all part of the cause.
Overall, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic
Analysis (the “BEA”) reported that from 2000 to 2011 private-sector, nonfarm
employment increased 12.5% in RTW States, while in forced-union dues states
such employment only increased 3.5%.
Thus, the increase in employment in the RTW States was nine percentage
points higher than, or over 3.5 times as great as, in forced-union dues
states. “Right to Work States Have
Superior Job Growth,” NRWN, Oct. 2012, p. 6. All of the bottom ten states in job creation
in that period did not have protection for their employees from forced-union
dues and monopoly union representation. Id.
The benefits of the new RTW Law in Indiana are already
showing up in a stronger economy. When
Indiana was a forced-union dues state, it had one of the worst economies in the
country. From 2000 to 2010 the BLS
determined that Indiana’s private-sector payroll employment declined by
9.1%. Just two other states, both
forced-union dues states, did worse during that time period. The Midwest’s forced-union dues states as a
group experienced a dismal decline of 9.8% during that period. However, during the same decade, the five
Midwestern states with RTW Laws actually experienced a slight increase by an
average of 0.5%. “’We’re Absolutely on
the Right Track,’” NRWN, August 2012, p. 5. By September 2012, six months after Indiana’s
RTW Law went into effect, Labor Department data showed that the number of new
private-payroll jobs in Indiana increased by nearly 100,000 or 4.1%. “Indiana Right to Work Statute Is Working,” NRWN,
Sept. 2012, p.5. Furthermore, the job
growth is likely to continue. The Indiana Economic Development Corporation,
reported that fifty-seven companies have Indiana investment projects in the
pipeline, which will bring $1.6 billion in new investment into the state, and many
companies indicated RTW was a factor in their decision. Id. In fact, in signing RTW Laws in Michigan,
Governor Snyder cited the favorable results in Indiana, including Indiana’s increase
in new jobs and its newfound ability to attract businesses. Matthew Dolan and Kris Maher, “Unions Dealt
Blow In UAW’s Home State,” The Wall Street Journal, 12/12/12 p. 1.
RTW States not only have better job creation, they also have
better compensation growth for employees.
According to Commerce Department data, private-sector compensation
(wages, salaries, benefits and bonuses) fell by 0.7% from 2001 to 2011 in then
forced-union dues Indiana, while it rose by 6.4% nationwide. Indiana and the six other Midwestern
forced-union dues states experienced an aggregate real private-sector
compensation decline of 2.7% during the same period. During the same decade, the five Midwestern
RTW States achieved an increase in real private-sector compensation of 13.0%.
“Indiana Right to Work Statute is Working,” Id. Superior job growth and superior compensation
growth in the RTW States equals a double win for employees. Effectively, under current Federal Law, an
employer in a unionized company cannot offer merit-based pay increases or
bonuses unless the union gives its permission or there is a federal finding of
an “impasse.” Mark Mix, “Union boss
bargaining hurts our most productive workers,” The Washington Examiner,
May 11-12, 2012. In a rare occurrence,
Governor Christie and the Newark Teachers Union recently agreed to permit merit
bonuses in the Newark schools. It would
be good to see more of this type of cooperation.
Right to Work Laws even affect the number of school-aged children. Apparently, parents would rather raise their
children in RTW States for a variety of reasons, including more job
opportunities, better compensation, work force flexibility, better chances for
job advancement, lower cost of living, better living environment, schools
without forced-union dues and lower taxes.
Whatever the reasons, the top seven states with the biggest gains in
school-aged population from 2000 to 2011 were all RTW States. Six of the seven states that lost the most
school-aged children were forced-union dues states. Katrina-ravaged Louisiana was the only
exception of a RTW State that lost school-aged children. In the aggregate, RTW States’ K-12
populations increased by 1.87 million or 9.2% since 2000, while forced-union dues
states have seen their school-aged populations drop by 1.21 million or
3.7%. Naturally, states that are losing
school-aged children are also providing fewer opportunities for teachers to
obtain employment, keep their jobs and achieve career advancement, and
vice-versa in states that are experiencing growth in the population of
school-aged children. “Right to Work =
Teacher Job Opportunities,” NRWN, Sept. 2012, p.3.
Senator Sweeney made several other bogus claims, including,
among others, that unions are “the reason a strong middle class is even
possible in our country.” Contrary to
Senator Sweeney’s spurious claim, it was hard work, economic freedom and the
constitutional protection of personal property rights that created the middle
class, not unions. The American middle
class actually started during the colonial period by applying the principles of
life, liberty and property espoused by John Locke, the Protestant principles
set forth in the 1599 Geneva Bible that the Pilgrims carried with them in 1620
on the Mayflower, and the Protestant work ethic. These principles were set forth in The
Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and they
allowed America, including the middle class, to continue to flourish.
The only way an economy can increase the average living
standards of its workers is through increased productivity. This productivity is derived partly by the
workers developing their own skills that lead to careers and upward
mobility. In addition, productivity increases
have derived primarily from entrepreneurs and inventors developing new
productivity-enhancing equipment and production processes. The progress in inventing
production-enhancing machinery and procedures has been going on for hundreds of
years, without the help of unions. The
list of inventions that have increased worker productivity is long and
storied. The list includes Eli Whitney’s
cotton gin in 1793, Cyrus McCormick’s reaper, developed by 1831, Henry Leland’s
contributions to standardized and interchangeable parts and his design and
development of the Cadillac and Lincoln automobiles, Henry Ford’s production
line and affordable Model T Ford, Thomas Edison’s 1,200 patents including the
light bulb, John D. Rockefeller’s improvement of the cracking tower, and
continued down to Bill Gates’ operating systems and Steve Jobs’ long list of
products at Apple Computer. If anything
unions have hindered this process of improving worker productivity through resisting
productivity-enhancing equipment. For an
example of how a union can hurt an economy, just look at what the UAW has done
to Detroit.
Senator Sweeney implies that unions represent workers;
however, unions represent only about 7% of workers and even fewer in the
private sector. If unions were as great
at representing employees as Senator Sweeney claims, then why would the
evidence show that, when employees are given a free choice as to whether or not
to join a union, many of them choose not to join a union.
The facts clearly indicate that RTW Laws are win-win for the
employees, the employers, jobs creation, increased real compensation, and
general economic health of the states that have such laws. Senator Sweeney should have a more open mind on the
advantages to employees and the health of the economy that are provided by
permitting employees the freedom to choose whether or not to join a union.