Editorial: Free workers by passing federal right-to-work law

Editorial: Free workers by passing federal right-to-work law

formatting link
When labor unions were still relevant, Labor Day was a holiday of union-sponsored parades and picnics, a chance to pause from the daily grind and celebrate the strength of solidarity.

But today, most people won't even think about labor unions as they go about enjoying what for all practical purposes is the last day of summer. That's because most American workers don't belong to a union and never have. Nor do they want to.

Just 12 percent of employees in the United States are union members. That's down from 20 percent in 1983 and is falling steadily. The loss of manufacturing jobs certainly has hurt Big Labor.

But so has its inability to connect with workers employed outside of factories and government offices.

Today's worker is more independent, more mobile and more comfortable interacting with his or her employer as an individual, rather than as part of a collective bargaining unit.

Still, too many workers are trapped against their will in unions they were forced to join by state and federal laws that support compulsory union membership and automatic dues deductions.

With Congress now under Democratic control, efforts have stepped up to strengthen those laws and undermine the ability of states to pass right-to-work legislation, which allows workers a choice in whether or not they join the union. Currently, 22 states have right-to-work laws.

Michigan should join them. Freeing workers from compulsory union membership would send an important signal that Big Labor no longer dictates policy and controls politics in Michigan.

The economies of the right-to-work states are growing far faster than the rest of the nation. That alone should be incentive for the state to modernize its labor laws.

As for Congress, instead of limiting the ability of states to protect workers from union conscription, it would do better to pass the National Right to Work Act that has been introduced several times, but without success.

Workers who want to join a union should have that right. But workers who don't want to join should have their rights respected, too.

Reply to
Jim Higgins
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
Chevy Man

Not a good omen when the main newspaper in Detroit, of all places, calls for a Federal right to work statute.

Reply to
Jim Higgins

I'm 81, when I was young before unions, my dad like most workers worked 12 hours a day six days a week for minimal wages and no benefits. Now that the unions have garnered all of the things working people enjoy and expect today, whether they belong to a union or not, some folks now think it is better for them to be an "associate" or a "team member" rather than a member of a union.

After all as an "associate" or a "team member" they receive many of the benefits that were gained by unions over the years and they do not need to pay union dues, that can average around four hours pay a month. The "only" difference, between being a union member and an "associate" or a "team member," is around $10 an hour for a similar job. LOL

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Reply to
Chevy Man

One thing that was surprising about that editorial was that it was by the main newspaper in Detroit, surely a sign of the times.

Reply to
Jim Higgins

formatting link
>>

You already mentioned that, Jim. Loosing more thinking capability every day, eh?

Reply to
80 Knight

Not really, companies that call their workers "associate" or a "team member" are not unionized. A SCAB is one who cross a picket line to work during a strike.

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

You can bet the farm the paper has union workers. ;)

mike

formatting link
>>

Reply to
Mike Hunter

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.