From the Richmond Times by NRTW President Mark  Mix:

Weathering an economic downturn is never easy, but some states are managing better than others.

Despite the recession, Virginia boasts a modest unemployment rate, and its average hourly wages top the national mean. What’s the Old Dominion’s secret? One factor that sets Virginia apart from its less fortunate neighbors is the state’s popular Right to Work law.

Virginia’s Right to Work law ensures that no employee can be forced to join or pay dues to a union just to get or keep a job. Protecting employee choice has always been the most important argument in favor of Right to Work, but Virginia’s economic performance is another point for worker freedom.

Recent studies from the Cato Institute and the National Institute for Labor Relations Research indicate that right-to-work states enjoy higher job growth and more disposable income (after adjusting for families’ cost-of-living) than their forced-unionism counterparts.

Eight of the top 11 states for wage and salary growth enjoy right-to-work protections. Meanwhile, 13 of the 14 worst performers lack right-to-work laws.

Workers and their families are also voting with their feet: According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, the young adult population in forced-unionism states has basically stagnated since 1980. Virginia, on the other hand, continues to attract a stream of new workers and entrepreneurs.

Protecting worker freedom also prepares states to handle a difficult recession better than their forced-unionism counterparts.

Virginia’s robust job and wage growth compares favorably with the sluggish performance of union-dominated states like Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin.

Not only that, but Virginia has been mercifully free from the type of political disruption plaguing forced-unionism states that try to tighten their belts by curbing the excesses of monopoly unionism.

Wisconsin and Ohio legislators endured disruptive protests and vicious, union-backed political campaigns because they had the temerity to challenge Big Labor’s public-sector stranglehold, an arrangement that drives up the cost of government while handing taxpayers the bill.

In states without public sector right-to-work protections, union bosses often funnel nonunion workers’ forced dues into coordinated political campaigns to protect and expand their special privileges.

As a result, every attempt to rein in government spending is met with fierce opposition from government union operatives, who will do almost anything to defend their forced-dues revenue stream.

The “Battle of Madison” in Wisconsin may have grabbed national headlines, but Richmond managed to avoid a similar showdown.

Virginia legislators were free to adjust their budgets to difficult and rapidly-changing economic conditions without the threat of massive, forced-dues-funded union politicking hanging over their heads.

Protecting worker freedom will always be at the core of Virginia’s longstanding Right to Work law. But in the midst of the worst recession in recent memory, the tangible economic benefits of Right to Work are worth appreciating, too.

The BNA news service reports that the attorneys general of South Carolina, Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia are challenging the NLRB’s overreach in its attempt to circumvent state Right To Work laws: 

The attorneys general of nine states April 28 sent a letter to National Labor Relations Board Acting General Counsel Lafe E. Solomon asserting that his approval of an unfair labor practice complaint challenging Boeing Co.’s decision to establish airplane production in South Carolina was an “ill-conceived retaliatory action” that “seeks to destroy our citizens’ right to work” and asking him to withdraw the complaint immediately.

The letter came a week after Solomon announced the issuance of a complaint alleging that Boeing illegally transferred some of the production of its 787 Dreamliner and related supply operations to South Carolina because Washingtonbased employees represented by the International Association of Machinists have in past years engaged in lawful strikes over contract disputes with the company (77 DLR AA-1, 4/21/11).

Time For Politicians in Both Parties to Own Up to Their Mistakes

In late February, many concerned Americans in other states were paying close attention to the fierce, and still unresolved, battle over public-sector union monopoly bargaining in Wisconsin.

Many observing the Madison showdown from their homes inwere undoubtedly amazed by what they saw.

These five states, like roughly a dozen others, have no statutes on the books empowering government union officials to act as state and local public employees’ monopoly-bargaining agents.

When elected officials in such states make a judgment that a reform in public-employee compensation packages and work rules is necessary and can be prudently implemented to give taxpayers a better return on their money, they have the power to proceed.

It is then up to the voting public to judge whether the reform was a good idea or not.

In Wisconsin, however, like in other states which statutorily mandate union monopoly bargaining over public employee pay, benefits, and working conditions, elected officials from the governor on down have far less control over the roughly 50% of public expenditures that go into employee compensation.

In the Badger State, half of state and local government employees are unionized. Elected officials and their appointees cannot make any significant changes in the way these employees are compensated or in how they are instructed to do their jobs without government union bosses’ approval.

Today, millions of Americans whose state and local governments operate free from Big Labor constraints appreciate, after watching the bitter struggle in Wisconsin unfold, better than ever before the importance of keeping union monopolists out of the government workplace.

Only Intense Right to Work Lobbying Blocked Monopoly-Bargaining Bill

What most freedom-loving Virginians, North Carolinians and Texans probably don’t realize is that, just last year, the U.S. Congress came within a hair of taking away their prerogative to decide how their state and local government workplaces are run.

At the outset of the 2009-2010 Congress, the votes were there to pass the so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” in both the House and the Senate. Furthermore, President Obama was publicly vowing to sign this legislation as soon as it reached his desk.

This measure, more accurately labeled the “Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill,” would have foisted Wisconsin-style labor relations on state and local public-safety departments in all 50 states.

When the House first voted on this legislation in 2007, nearly 99% of the Democrats voting sided with Big Labor, and 98 GOP congressmen also voted for it.

Naturally, many Washington insiders considered approval of federally mandated union monopoly bargaining a sure thing after Barack Obama became President.

But an intense, two-year-long lobbying and public mobilization campaign by the National Right to Work Committee kept this power grab from ever reaching Mr. Obama’s desk in 2009 or 2010.

Recent Past Should Not Be Forgotten

Fortunes change swiftly in politics, and today the momentum is on the side of proponents of rolling back compulsory unionism in government, not expanding it. (See, e.g., this month’s Newsletter cover story.)

But in fighting for a brighter future, pro-Right to Work citizens should not forget the recent past.

Politicians in both parties who recently supported federalizing monopolistic government unionism should be held accountable for what they almost succeeded in doing.

As a start, Right to Work members (especially constituents) are urged now to contact the U.S. representatives listed below.

According to Fox News’ Judson Berger, “Wisconsin Union Battle Could Set Stage for National ‘Right To Work’ Debate.”  More from Berger’s article:

The standoff in Wisconsin over the benefits and rights of public employees could for the first time in decades spur changes across the country over so-called “right-to-work” laws — or laws that prohibit unions from forcing workers to join.

Along with requiring public employees to contribute more to pensions and health care coverage, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker wants to put his state in the right-to-work column. His proposals have touched off an epic battle in Madison between pro-labor Democrats and Republicans who say they’re just trying to balance the budget. 

And now that battle is spreading.

Throngs of union members and supporters gathered in Indianapolis Monday for a protest against a proposed bill in the Indiana House that would restrict collective bargaining rights and make it a misdemeanor to require any employee to join or pay dues to a union.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, in an interview with Fox News on Monday, directly attributed Virginia’s ease in balancing its budget to the fact that it is a right-to-work state.

“We’re a right-to-work state, so I don’t have a lot of the challenges that (Walker) has in Wisconsin,” McDonnell said. Virginia is nevertheless considering a proposal to add a right-to-work provision into the state’s constitution.

“Unlike in federal government, we’ve got to balance our budgets,” McDonnell said.

Wisconsin Governor-elect Scott Walker has laid out an ambitious agenda, such as turning the department of commerce into a public-private partnership and lifting the cap on school vouchers. But his boldest idea may be rescinding the right of government employees to collectively bargain.

Mr. Walker floated the idea last week in response to union opposition to his modest proposal to require employees to contribute 5% of their pay to their pensions and to increase their health-care contributions to 12% from as low as 4% today. Even along the Left Coast most state workers contribute 10% of their salary to pensions. The Republican estimates that these changes would save the state $154 million in the first six months. Over two years they’d reduce the state’s $3.3 billion budget gap by nearly 20%.

The ability of public workers to form unions and bargain collectively is a phenomenon of the last century when state and local governments were relatively small. But it has proven to be a catastrophe for taxpayers, as public unions have used their political clout to negotiate rich deals on wages, pensions and health care. California governor-elect Jerry Brown greased the wheels for his state’s long fiscal decline when he allowed collective bargaining during his first stint in the statehouse in the 1970s.

Republican Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana and then Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri rescinded collective bargaining by executive order in 2005, and the change made it easier to cut spending and restructure government services. In Wisconsin, the legislature would have to rewrite the Employment Labor Relations Act, but Republicans will control both the assembly and senate and have the political incentive to go along with Mr. Walker.Rescinding public collective bargaining rights restores a better negotiating balance between taxpayers and government employees who ostensibly work for them. Political officials are no longer on both sides of the bargaining table—representing taxpayers in negotiations with the unions while seeking union cash and endorsements when running for re-election.

Twelve states including North Carolina and Virginia don’t allow government workers collective bargaining rights, and another 12 allow it only for some unions. These states by and large have managed to hold down their pension liabilities better than have those where public employee unions essentially run the government—see Illinois, New Jersey and California.

Republican leaders are often reluctant to challenge government unions so directly because it means a big political battle, but now is the time to strike when the public understands the need for reforming government. Mr. Walker’s proposal is the kind of big structural reform that can make other reforms easier to accomplish. We hope it’s the start of a national trend.

As Perry states, “In other words, the decline in economic growth growth in forced unionism states (-2.42%) was 0.76% worse in 2009 than the decline in right-to-work states (-1.66%).  Further, of the ten states that experienced positive growth in 2009, only two were forced unionism states (Alaska and W. Virginia) and eight were right-to-work states (Nebraska, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Arkansas, Louisiana, Virginia, Oklahoma and Wyoming).  The three top states with the highest growth in 2009 were all right-to-work states: Oklahoma (6.6%), Wyoming (5.4%) and North Dakota (3.9%). “

The publisher of Virginia Business, Bernie Niemeier, reminds readers among the natural advantages of states  such as  California, New York and Virginia it is often the “legal advantages”  ”like being the northernmost Right To Work state and having reasonable tort laws and a relatively low corporate income tax rate” that separates Virginia from the pack.

Excerpts from Niemeier’s  editorial, Job creation is fueled by existing business expansion:

Over the past few years, Virginia’s economic development news has been full of big marquee names: Volkswagen, Altria, Hilton, SAIC, Northrop Grumman and others. The commonwealth has held a winning hand in the high-profile game of attracting corporate headquarters from California, New York and other states.

Natural advantages such as the Port of Virginia, Dulles Airport and proximity to Washington, D.C., are important parts of our success. Legal advantages — like being the northernmost right-to-work state and having reasonable tort laws and a relatively low corporate income tax rate — also make Virginia an attractive place to do business.

When high-profile new business announcements are made, many take credit and rightfully so. Major out-of-state and international relocations involve the governor’s office, the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VEDP), regional economic development alliances and local-level economic development offices.

We’ve been a little less than humble in continually reminding ourselves and others of our reputation as the best-managed state, one of the best states in which to do business and the most business-friendly state, among other accolades.

But perhaps Virginia’s existing businesses have been too humble in taking credit for the jobs their expansion and growth have created, especially during difficult economic times. In fact, existing businesses have led the commonwealth in job creation over the past several years.

According to VEDP, job-creation announcements from existing businesses accounted for 78 percent of all new jobs announced during 2009. Preliminary figures for the first nine months of 2010 show that new jobs created by the expansion of existing businesses will account for 62 percent of this year’s announced job growth.

The top 10 job creation announcements by expanding businesses so far this year have been made by Capital One, KPMG, NeuStar, InMotion Hosting, New Media Strategies, IntelliDyne, O’Sullivan Films, ManTech International, Monogram Food Solutions, Mercury Paper and The Results Cos.

These companies and other existing businesses involved in more than 6,000 smaller projects are doing their part to keep Virginia a leader in economic prosperity. To all of them, we say thank you for doing what you do so well.

(Source: May 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has sent out an unmistakable signal that he is dead set on pushing through a bill that would undermine state Right to Work laws and soak state and local taxpayers for billions of dollars in additional goverment costs.

On April 12, Mr. Reid reintroduced as S.3194 the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, which was already pending in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee as S.1611.

Mr. Reid’s clear purpose in carrying out this tactical maneuver was to make it possible for him to bring up this federal government union power grab for a Senate floor vote at any time, with as little as 48 hours public notice and with no HELP Committee action whatsoever in advance.

Harry Reid and his cohorts cynically mislabel their legislation, also introduced in the U.S. House as H.R.413 by union-label Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.), as the “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.”

States’ Bitter Experiences Illustrate Dangers of Harry Reid’s Scheme

But that moniker has nothing to do with reality. S.3194/H.R.413 would institute a federal mandate foisting union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

Reid-Kildee would force countless policemen, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they never asked for or voted for, and want nothing to do with.

It would also constitute a major step towards Big Labor’s decades-old goal of enacting a federal law that foists union monopoly bargaining on front-line state and local employees of all types across America.

“In recent years, the expansion of public-sector union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining empire has become the top challenge to the prosperity of America’s private sector,” said National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“Consequently, the states in which government union bosses are relatively less powerful are our nation’s growth engine.”

According to labor economists Barry Hirsch and David Macpherson, as of 2004 fewer than one in four public-sector workers were unionized in 16 states. That same year, more than half of public-sector employees were unionized in 15 states.

From 2004 through 2009, the aggregate real personal income for the 16 states where government union bosses wielded the least power grew by 11.0%, an increase nearly two-and-a-half times as great as the total real income growth for the 15 states with the most public-sector monopoly bargaining.

And real income growth for the lowest union-monopoly states was greater by two-thirds than the national average.

Reid-Kildee Would ‘Replicate California’s Disaster Nationally’

Mr. Mix commented:

“This spring, incredibly, the U.S. Congress is poised to pass, and President Barack Obama is vowing to sign, legislation designed to help government union bigwigs seize monopoly-bargaining control over majorities of public employees in all 50 states.

“To get an idea of where Reid-Kildee could take America, you need only look at California, where nearly 60% of public employees are unionized (compared to 41% nationwide) and government union bosses have for years gotten practically everything they wanted.

“Today, Californians fork over a higher share of their incomes in state and local taxes than residents of all but five other states, but still face unfunded public-employee pension liabilities of as much as $500 billion. Meanwhile, overall income growth in the once-Golden State has fallen well below the national average in recent years.

“Does Congress really want to replicate California’s disaster nationally?”

Reid-Kildee would rewrite the public-sector labor laws of the vast majority of the 50 states to make them more pro-forced unionism.

In states that haven’t caved in to Big Labor demands for monopoly bargaining, Reid-Kildee would federally impose it, denying localities the option to refuse to grant a single union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, S.3194/H.R.413 would widen its scope.

Right to Work States Would Likely Lose Key Edge They’ve Had Up to Now

“Employees and businesses in the 22 states with Right to Work laws, which prohibit the firing of employees for refusal to join or pay dues to an unwanted union, would lose a key advantage they’ve had up to now,” noted Mr. Mix.

“As Ohio University’s Richard Vedder, a widely recognized expert in labor economics, pointed out in a recent scholarly article, one important reason Right to Work states typically enjoy superior job and income growth is that a far smaller share of their employees are under union monopoly-bargaining control.

“But Reid-Kildee would facilitate the rapid spread of government union monopoly bargaining in states, overwhelmingly Right to Work states, where it has up to now been rare.

“While this federal scheme does not directly authorize forced dues in states where they are now prohibited, it obviously would reduce the relative attractiveness of the business climates of Right to Work states like Virginia, North Carolina, and Texas.

“Politicians who claim otherwise are either misinformed, or simply lying.”

“Right to Work supporters face an uphill battle against S.3194/H.R.413,” Mr. Mix acknowledged. “In the Big Labor-dominated House, the most we can do is slow the legislation down to buy time. And President Obama has publicly promised Big Labor he will sign the bill into law if he gets a chance.

“Our only chance of victory is in the Senate. That’s why, right now, Right to Work members and supporters are doing everything they can to mobilize 41 senators to sustain an extended debate and keep S.3194 from coming up for a final vote for as long as necessary.”