A UNM sociology professor and her Oregon-based sidekick are on the warpath against the Rio Grande Foundation and our research on “right to work.” As usual, their “research” is lacking and elicited a swift response from us.
Interestingly, given the brevity of New Mexico’s 30-day session and the attention shift to criminal justice issues, it is looking less likely that “right to work” (or many other economic reforms) will get a serious look in the 2016 Legislature. That is not the case in West Virginia where “right to work” will likely pass in a matter of weeks (making the state the 26th to do so).
This article from West Virginia sums up the arguments on “right to work” fairly well. The author cites a study by the Legislature’s Bureau of Business and Economic Research which found “RTW policy leads to long-run rates of GDP growth that are around .5 percentage point higher than non-RTW states…The study also found a 1.4 percent job rate growth in RTW states over the last two decades, compared with one percent in non-RTW states.”
The writer also noted that,
While (right to work) would be a blow to union power, it’s not a death knell. Instead, it may give rise here to “members-only agreements” where unions represent only the workers who choose to belong. The unions are under no obligation to provide any representation or services for non-union workers.
2 Replies to “RGF attacked (again) on Right to Work; Non-partisan West Virginia report further buttresses economic case for RTW”
Right-to-work could trigger much-needed reform of unions by forcing them to return to their original function of organizing and representing members, instead of serving as a political fundraising engine. If they choose to do so, unions could become organizations that workers will join voluntarily.
Public unions generally are a pox upon the land, and should be abolished immediately with evidence there is a civil service law or program in place and effect. They have and continue to bankrupt public entities across the land.
I note a “spokesperson” commented that the $27 mil brought into NM for school breakfasts is a good thing. For whom? You feed them at their desk, while being watched accomplishing nothing, or send them to a lunch room to return while being watched accomplishing nothing.
The funds are better spent on earned income credits, earned by sending parents to school to learn parenting and cooking. And not taught by some knothead who says “All proteins are complete.”