Governor explains right-to-work

The hot topic in Lansing right now, beginning late last week, is the right-to-work legislation. It was quickly passed by the House and Senate, and Gov. Rick Snyder is expected to sign it into law.
Dec 11, 2012


The governor explained why he supports the legislation in his blog on Dec. 7.

"Michigan is making a comeback thanks to hardworking women and men, business owners, entrepreneurs, students and professionals of all kinds," Snyder wrote. "But for us to succeed, we have to remain competitive. That's why I believe we should make Michigan a freedom-to-work state."

The governor followed with a background on the issue, then concluded with his opinion on why it should be enacted in Michigan.

"Just like Michigan's natural beauty attracts tourists from around the country, our economic conditions attract workers and businesses, too. But if another state can offer a better home — either for a company or a worker — Michigan can lose out, no matter how great our state may be. That's why we must remain competitive," Snyder wrote for his "Reinventing Michigan" blog.

To read more of the governor's blog, click here.



Finally....common sense prevails. Congratulations to the Michigan legislature and Gov. Rick Snyder. This is another example as to why this body and our Governor has put Michigan in a top 3 ranking for the most likely States to recover first from the economic slow down of the past 5 years. More jobs to Michigan help everyone, including the Unions.


Too bad years of extensive research of RTW states since 1949 show a somewhat different story. Although it does, on average, decrease both unionized AND non-union wages by about $1,500/year, no evidence can be found that RTW has any significant positive effect on job creation or the economy whatsoever. Other factors can be attributed to economic improvements, but RTW isn't one of them. In the case of Oklahoma, it had the negative effect of actually increasing unemployment (which had been steadily decreasing). SO - if RTW has no significant positive effect on job creation/employment, but does decrease ALL workers wages/benefits, why in the world would the Michigan Republican legislature push through RTW in less than a week in a lame duck session, making it impossible for voters to vote on it by deliberately attaching appropriations bills on it, or even debate or discuss it, amid a public outcry, and put it on Rick's desk after he's said over and over RTW is not on his agenda? If this is your idea of Democracy At Work, I have a bridge to sell you.


It's now law - a win for workers, freedom of choice, Michigan taxpayers, liberty, and the Michigan economy; for the thugs who showed what they are at the Capitol today, not so much. Workers still have the right to join a union and bargain collectively. If unions are response to their members, and don't lavish their dues money on stratospheric union bosses and union employees salaries and benefits, and on political contributions contrary to the politics of the members, unions should flourish.


Apparently you are counting on Michigan bucking the trend among RTW states that shows that RTW laws have no positive effect whatsoever on the economy. Experience does show that it DECREASES ALL wages/benefits of both union and non-union workers by about $1,500/year, on average. That's a lot of lost tax revenue. This is an example of using a gun to kill a fly. Surely there are other ways to encourage unions to be responsive to their members without compromising all workers and putting the Michigan unemployment turn-around in jeopardy (which has happened in a number of states that became RTW).


Specific sources for your allegations, please.


Already gave them several comments ago - you gotta keep up Vlad. So now comments are labeled as "allegations"....w o w.


In this thread? where? In a different article's comment? EPI. Here's what they are


Bad link - here's the correct one:

"The Economic Policy Institute was founded in 1986 by Jeff Faux, who was previously the co-director of the National Center for Economic Alternatives (NCEA). As its name suggests, the NCEA specialized in offering "alternatives"—alternatives characterized as "radical" in The New York Times—to mainstream U.S. domestic policy."


Actually, the EPI, a liberal, non-partisan group since 1988, is a highly respected and trusted source of research and data for economists of all persuasions. Not hardly on a scale with the Machiavellian Heritage Foundation and it's offspring, funded by the Brothers Koch, Waltons, and other Tea Party billionaires and Masters of the Universe.



I have to give you credit for dogged persistence, which is something leftists have worked on for years, unlike the Stupid Party (Republican). In fact, I suspect you are, if not on the payroll, a trusted ghost letter writer for Obama or some other leftist organization.

You are free to have your own opinions, but not your own facts, which are published to mislead and deceive readers who are not particularly into politics. The Economic Policy Institute is only well respected by the hard leftists on the political spectrum, and it is not “non-partisan” in any real sense of that word – it is the handmaiden of unions and big government leftists.

From mid-2004 to 2010, the Economic Policy Institute raised over $9.8 million from labor unions, according the disclosures available from the Department of Labor’s Office of Labor-Management Standards. In 2011 alone, the Economic Policy Institute received over $1.8 million from unions in contributions, gifts and grants, political activities, and representational activities. The donors include the AFL-CIO, UFCW, and the Teamsters.
And have you ever taken a look at their board members? A few people to note:
Richard Trumka (AFL-CIO), Chairman
R. Thomas Buffenbarger (IAMAW)
Larry Cohen (CWA)
Leo W. Gerard (USWA)
Joseph T. Hansen (UFCW)
Mary Kay Henry (SEIU)
Bob King (UAW)
Gerald W. McEntee (AFSCME)
Randi Weingarten (AFT)

So let's be fair – if you want to quote factoids from this source, that's fine – just don't lie about what they are in reality. See from The Center For Consumer Freedom for full information about this organization, including its work for big tobacco and the reports it tailored to the cigarette companies.


I wonder when people have to work 3 jobs to make a living if they will still think this was a great idea? Our forefathers died trying to get a union going and get better working conditions. Two weeks ago 100 people in China died in a warehouse fire because the boss' locked the doors and told them to go back to work, this is what will happen here in the future. Oh yes it will, wait and see.


I think you may be right...


Post a Comment

Log in to your account to post comments here and on other stories, galleries and polls. Share your thoughts and reply to comments posted by others. Don't have an account on Create a new account today to get started.