From what I understand, the legislation will allow individual employees to decide if they would like to be in union or not. (If it’s a union shop) So let’s say you are a teacher… this legislation would allow you to opt out of the teacher’s union and remain being a teacher. Or if you work at a plant and would like to leave the union, this would allow you to do that and still keep your job.
I can’t lie. I think this is a good idea for Michigan. Take a look at the map. Southern states are the ones attracting businesses. Even places like Boise, Idaho have made the list so there is hope for Michigan! Check out Forbes Magazines “Best Places for Business” list and you’ll see that almost all of the top 10 are located in right to work states. (8 out of the 10.)
I’m not saying “let’s stop the unions” and I’m not a union hater. What I am saying is that there should be legislation that allows employees to chose what is best for them. Employees should have the ability to chose if they’d like to pay into a union, accept union benefits, or otherwise opt in or opt out without threats.
Would right to work negatively impact unions? Probably. As I talk to people in my life who are in unions most would opt out if they could. The one protection they appreciate most, job security, hasn’t worked in Michigan or protected jobs. Companies simply haven’t been able to afford union workers and remain profitable in this new economy. There is a general assumption among pro-union people that the buying public is willing to pay more for products produced in union shops. Wal*Mart, Toyota, and Honda have blown that theory out of the water. The American people may say that they will buy “American made” or “union pride” products… but they don’t care. Consumers are driven by value, price, and how a product makes them feel.
Why am I so suspicious of the “anti-right to work” ad campaign? Um, follow the money trail.