President Obama traveled to Michigan today to campaign for higher taxes and to keep pinning Republicans on the defensive. During his remarks, he also spoke out against the state’s new right-to-work law, which is expected to be signed into law tomorrow.
“What we shouldn’t do–I just gotta say this–what we shouldn’t be doing is trying to take away your rights to bargain for better wages and working conditions,” Obama said in the speech, which was meant to be on fiscal cliff issues. “We shouldn’t be doing that.”
“You know, these so-called right-to-work laws don’t have to do with economics, they have to do with politics,” Obama continued. “What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money.”
Yeah, that’s what’s called a “lie.” Michigan’s right-to-work law makes the state an “open shop” state, meaning workers will no longer be forced to join unions to work in certain occupations, and will no longer be forced to pay from their pockets to unions that use that money in political causes. It forces unions to make the case that membership for workers is worth their money, and workers can keep their own money if they so choose. It does not impact collective bargaining rights.
Michigan’s union membership has been declining sharply in recent years, from 26% in 1989 to just 16.5% in 2011. Michigan’s workers have clearly decided that union membership is not for them in ever growing numbers. Younger workers are less likely to join unions in the first place. The state’s new law just prevents the unions from skimming non-worker paychecks against their will.
Right-to-work may also make Michigan more open for business, which would bring in more jobs the state that has an unemployment rate of 9.3% officially . The state that has seen Detroit turn from a bastion of American success into an economic abscess can use all the help to attract business that it can get.
Barack Obama once again reveals himself as nothing more than a special interest agitator who happens to occupy the White House. He promised to carry Big Labor’s agenda with him, and he is doing that, no matter the consequences to most workers and those who want jobs. If he had the majority of workers’ interests at heart, he would knock off knocking right-to-work. I’m sure he’ll do that right after he stops pushing for tax hikes on job creators, and he’ll do that right after he announces that he supports repealing ObamaCare.
Additionally: Using patented Democrat logic, the people of Michigan elected their state legislators, who in turn passed the right-to-work law. Gov. Snyder, who was also elected by the people, will sign it. It passed by stronger majorities than ObamaCare enjoyed in the US Congress. So, therefore, it’s settled law that must not be opposed or even tampered with, no?
– of the dues.
Obama lies? OMG,really? So what? There is nothing we can do anyway. Lie away Commie in chief, lie away. I can NOT believe what we’re witnessing, although I must. Lamentations abound.
Except that, much as with school vouchers, everyone is painfully aware of the real purpose- in this case to kill off unions, which means that what Obama said was accurate- this move is intended to prevent workers from being unionized at all and thus having any bargaining power.
Obvious;y when you make it possible for people to have all the benefits of the union without having to pay for it they will behave as parasites (that thing you guys claim to despise and yet encourage) eventually killing the union. You know it. I know it. So can we please drop the sham where the right pretends to care a whit about workers?
Your actions belie your words.
I’ve never quite understood this. Whose rights are being violated? The guy who’s *forced* to join the Union has the *right* to be forced, so that he can back a political candidate, whether he’s in agreement with him or not? No, the reality here is that the only people who lose if this law passes are the Union bosses, and their buddies in the Democratic Party. Back in the day, half a century ago, if you got hurt at work there typically was no protection for you. Now, if your employer’s insurance doesn’t cover the injury, you simply sue. Most juries are sympathetic, so you wind up with a big pile of money. The Union doesn’t do much for such a person; however it does a lot for the Dems, who can use the money to elect their people to various legislative bodies.
And what about the people who have relatives at home, who are forced to join SEIU, in return for which the Union does *absolutely* nothing? How do you justify that?
In all the bushwah about ‘free riders on the backs of Unions’,etc., we hear little about how political activism dues are extracted from The Unwilling
and G D their intrnsic, Creator-Given rights to their property and monies.
Unions at one time were deemed essential, and in large part this has some truth to it.
…But as history teaches us, over and over again, Groups such as this off-times live for themselves, their perceived power, and little else.
If Unions are so beneficial, why (??), almost without exception are they not making the case (with examples that can be verified and factualized)that
Unions Add Value to the enterprise they have membership in ?? Use somma’ that green stuff and show us you got it where it counts.
All those former Union members in Wisconsin who just ceased paying were not all morons, now were they ? What did ‘That Collective’ know, [and acted on] that the above writer does not seem to?
How about competition in Unionism and have some run-off elections, and choices, for those that want them?
Let’s hold our breath, and wait for that to happen….., turning blue yet?
As an aside, this law, as written does nothing to existing contracts at all. There are going to be changes made and the potential for reduced power over individuals is what is driving this Special Interest Collective.
Re: Vouchers: Not at all. The real purpose is to improve education. What gets killed off in the process, or what gets protected, is not the issue. Claiming that the purpose of vouchers is to kill unions is like claiming that the purpose of KFC is to kill chickens- yes, that occurs in the process, but it’s certainly not the purpose, and if you could manage better sales with not a single chicken death, no one would stop you.
“You know, these so-called right-to-work laws don’t have to do with economics, they have to do with politics,” Obama continued. “What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money.”
Actually, right-to-work laws have everything to do with economics.
Right-to-work means that unions can’t require an employee be fired for declining to pay union dues or agency fees, while maintaining a union’s ability to collectively bargain.
Right-to-work offers in-state opportunities for young workers. Between 2000 and 2011, right-to-work states have seen an increase of 11.3 percent in the number of residents between the ages of 25-34, according to the Bureau of the Census. Non-right-to-work states, over that same period of time, have seen an increase of only 0.6 percent.
Right-to-work means increasing wages. Private-sector, inflation-adjusted employee compensation in right-to-work states has grown by 12.0 percent between 2001-2011, according to data taken from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics. That compares with just 3.0 percent over the same period in forced-unionization states.
Right-to-work means low unemployment. Between 1999 and 2009, non-farm private-sector employment grew 3.7 percent in right-to-work states, but decreased 2.8 percent in non-right-to-work states. Further, the vast majority of jobs created during the Obama administration have been in states with a right-to-work law. According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, right-to-work states (excluding Indiana, which passed a right-to-work law in early 2012) “were responsible for 72 percent of all net household job growth across the U.S. from June 2009 through September 2012.”
Right-to-work makes states more attractive for business. States with right-to-work laws dominate the “Top States for Business,” as determined by CNBC. For 2012, nine out of the top 10 best states for business are right-to-work states. By contrast, Michigan is currently 33.
Perhaps unemployed Obamee voters should be asking why businesses are leaving the state and taking jobs with them to right-to-work states like the job growth champ, Texas.
I’m not so sure you aren’t being a bit too hard on the President. You have to leave open the possibility he is stupid enough to believe his own BS.
The union are not for that working man their for thrier self
that do not care if you don’t a good contract they are for their
one thing there big fact check, as any Air traffic Controller.
Lament of the Engineer in an union shop, sung to the tune of the ILGWU “look for the union label”
“So always look for the union steward, when you fixing a motor or switch.
Remember somewhere, a brother’s loafing, his stewards watching for engineers, who do the work they’re paid for, but who’s complaining. Just cause union take home is bigger than ours?
So always look for, the union steward, remember, he’s able to fire your @ss awayyyy.”