Can't read that shank...its a paysite man!

rtw doesnt create any new jobs - the same amount of jobs will be there. rtw just strips our right to bargain it doesnt give any new opportunities. rtw lowers wages dramatically, health benefits get worse and worse, pensions shrink, rtw states spend A LOT less on education, the economy will take a big hit. how many more ppl do you think will be eligible for welfare and other state/federal benefits after families are making 5k less per year. you seem to hate those programs so much? - this will only make more ppl enroll for them.

most rtw states have had this law for decades, the best way to compare is probably oklahoma who passed this in 2001. here is a good article on it if you like to read.

http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cwed/wp/right_to_work.pdf

here some highlights..

"manufacturing employment and

relocations into the state reversed their climb and

began to fall, precisely the opposite of what right-towork advocates promised."

"there is reason to believe that

right-to-work laws may actually harm a state’s

economic prospects."

"If states with right-to-work laws can experience

either dramatic growth or steep declines, and if both

right-to-work and non-right-to-work states can foster

booming job markets, then it is clear that something

else in these states’ economies, demographics, or policies

must be driving job growth, while right-to-work laws

account for little if anything in these trends.

When one examines the facts underlying the averages,

it appears that recommending right-to-work as a solution

to unemployment is on par with suggesting that one’s

personal wealth can increase by having a beer in Bill

Gates’ favorite watering hole."

"Yet the facts show the exact opposite of what right-towork supporters predicted. Not only has manufacturing

employment failed to rise in Oklahoma, but, after increasing

steadily the previous 10 years, it has fallen steadily in every

year since right-to-work was adopted."

Good stuff Neo!

Right to work helps the top of the food chain and that's it. It allows big companies to take home more profits and that's all. Its a push by the rich to get states to go that way because when profits increase they are happy because the rest of the people don't matter!

http://www.prisonblock.com/forums/XBOX-S-LOTTERY-t44484.html

heres the wsj article:By NEIL SHAH And BEN CASSELMAN

Right-to-work laws don't appear to have a significant impact on wages, though data are hard to come by.

In October, the most recent month for which state-level data are available, the average unemployment rate in right-to-work states was 6.9%. For the other 27 states the average unemployment rate was 7.6%. Thirteen of the 23 right-to-work states had unemployment rates below the national rate of 7.9% in October.

Wages are generally lower in right-to-work states. Private-sector employees in right-to-work states earned $737.81 a week on average over the past 12 months, nearly 10% less than in states without such laws. But cause and effect are unclear, in part because most states with right-to-work laws passed the legislation decades ago, making it difficult to determine how the policies affect wages.

Some economists say when differences in costs of living are taken into account, wages are roughly the same, or even higher in right-to-work states.

A study by the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, an antiunion research group, found that employees in right-to-work states earned an average of $675 a week, compared with $660 in non-right-to-work states.

But many studies showing higher wages in right-to-work states ignore relevant factors, such as how business-friendly a state is, that may be the real driver of wages, economists said.

"When you take these factors into account, you can't find any effect of the right-to-work law on wages," said Walter Wessels, an economics professor at North Carolina State University, who has studied the issue.

Oklahoma, which passed a right-to-work law more recently, hasn't seen a big impact on employee earnings. When Oklahoma passed its law in 2001, the average weekly wage of the state's private-sector workers was $531, or 76% of the national average.

A decade later, private-sector workers in Oklahoma earned $772 a week, 84% of the national mark. But Oklahoma's labor market over the past decade has generally been stronger than the nation's as a whole, making it hard to pinpoint the law's impact.

In a 2009 study, Lonnie Stevans, an associate professor of information technology and quantitative methodsat Hofstra University, found a slight drop in workers' wages in right-to-work states, compared with non-right-to-work states, between 1990 and 2005.

Mr. Stevans, who controlled for differences in economic growth among states, said the difference in wages between right-to-work and non-right-to-work states was "statistically significant." But he isn't sure whether this is the result of the law. "The empirical issue here is whether differences…are the result of the genuine effect of right-to-work legislation or due to the existence of pro-business sentiment that would have led to right-to-work legislation anyway," he said.

—Neil Shah

and Ben Casselman

Last edited by shawshank 13 years ago

Rtw laws don't impact wages? Rofl that's exactly what they do is lower wages. Not to account for less benefits. Cost of living going down is BS....no businesses are about to take over those losses for u. This law will have real bad effect in Michigan one of most unionized states in country

http://www.mnaflcio.org/news/right-work-laws-get-facts

Good info worm...consistent with what Neo said! I believe the truth is right there for people to read, RTW is not good for the people!

yeah nothing like reading "facts" from the afl-cio's website... that's fair.

so i live in Pennsylvania and i work in manufacturing. I am a moderate who disagrees with the exorbanent amount of money factory unions spend on political lobbying, lavish outings for the union leadership, and unreasonable expenses and salaries for union members at the union hall. What am I supposed to do, pack up and move to another state so i'm not subject to forking over anywhere from $300 - $1000+ per year to support the unions cause?

Shouldn't a union have to work to earn the money from the workers, essentially a free enterprise, instead of forcing everyone to buy their product? What if I've worked a plant for 20 years and the union doesn't make a push for demands I want as an employee, fails to file grievances that i feel are necessary, why would I want to pay for that product.