Chart from the Economic Policy Institute
Based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data
Tonight on the show, we're going to look at the showdown in Indiana over an anti-union bill now in the state legislature. Indiana Republicans are pushing a law that would effectively ban union shops. This type of legislation is known as a Right to Work bill.
Gordon Lafer at the Economic Policy Institute writes that the Right to Work name is deceptive:
Despite the name, right-to-work laws do not confer any sort of right to a job. Rather, they dilute union bargaining strength by making it harder for workers’ organizations to sustain themselves financially. Proponents argue that by weakening labor laws, RTW will lure outside companies—particularly manufacturers—into the state.
In Indiana and elsewhere, large sums of money have been devoted to backing RTW bills, with lobbyists claiming that RTW significantly improves both the number of jobs in a state and the wages people earn because companies that had avoided the state will flock there. The evidence shows that these claims are completely without scientific foundation.
He includes the chart above, which shows Indiana creating far more manufacturing jobs than states with Right to Work laws. In the chart below, you can see that being a Right to Work state has by no means been a shield against job loss. More on the show tonight.
Chart from Economic Policy Institute
Public Citizen data
Leave a Comment:
http://www.mackinac.org/9422
Every study has its own data.
Yes, but the study you link to uses Michigan and only Michigan (one of the hardest-hit states in the union, if not the hardest hit) as its sole example of a non-right to work state. It took about 5 seconds to see what they were doing there. They picked the worst example they could find and presented it as the standard. Poor, poor, work.
er this is why you do not want to use data that is out of date. Most academics will tell you that you need to stay w/in the year relevant that you are researching or to minimize distance (and never use sources more than 5 years old if they can be avoided unless it's relevant to the discussion). This is because data changes from month to month and year to year, especially w/ economic studies. In this instance Contessa is linking to a study that stopped in 2007 and highlights MI above all other states. RTW versus unionized are relatively stable (as the other portion of the graph shows), but it emphasizes MI in an attempt to make it seem as though MI (a highly unionized state) is the standard bearer. Of course the article doesn't look at correlations between any other factor in the market. To be fair, neither does the one presented by the TRMS staff. The data has significantly changed from 2007 to now. Most RTW states are not any better off than unionized states and vise versa. To be fair to the conservative view point, you cannot argue the inverse w/ the data that is relevant from 2011 or even 2010 (that unionization creates jobs). It's simply to say- as I pointed out on the other thread- that there does not seem to be a correlation between RTW, unionization, and employment. While a correlation might very well exist, said correlation is minimalistic at best and is being way over emphasized by the right wing. This is especially bad because looking for such limited correlations leads us away from causality and thus makes it harder for us to actually solve the jobs crisis.
I am still at a loss as to how a market that represents less than 12% of the nation can have such a huge impact on businesses. I really wish someone would explain that to me.
I would rather see a chart that shows: of the companies that took manufacturing jobs to other countries, that are now returning operations to the US, How many are RTW VS Union?
I'd like to see that study too. Or any comprehensive study, really, on why a company chose to move states, chose to move to another nation, or chooses to come back to the US. Perhaps they wouldn't even cite unionization or rtw in their list? I'd like to see how many subsidies or tax breaks or other benefits the company got from the local government and/or the federal government and other such factors. As I said neither side really seems to have a compelling argument in the pro or the con (pro union or con union) when it comes to job creation or job retention. They certainly have an arguable difference between wages and benefits earned, but not w/ the other two areas. A more in depth study could tell us what we're missing or why the correlations seem so scattered.
My first thought was,"Why isn't my state on this list"
Second thought was "Why did they pick these particular states?"
The second chart shows RTW states against unionized states. This is not just about Michigan.
I should redact: the study contessa linked is one by an institute that operates on and comments on Michigan state policy. That's why they have the special emphasis on Michigan state. The study still is outdated in information and still does not focus on all the complexities of the market. As I said based on the very data it presents there is not a huge difference between RTW and union states.
Kansas, the only state listed above with job loss had a Democrat Governor for the majority of the time. All the others had a Republican leader during one of the most economic trying times ever in US. I think they've been doing things right, let them continue would be my vote.
I see our resident fake news junkie is back, missed you Contessa, hope you had a great vacation.
Facts are irrelevant to people, including blue collar workers, who hate unions. Business people hate unions because they have power. Why blue collar workers hate unions is beyond my comprehension.
they have been brainwashed by the rich, to believe that their union dues go to fund the Sapranos lifestyle, which just isnt true!
another reason people hate unions is: they are jealous that they are not in one and are too scared to attempt to unionize their workplace!
@Mike Paganucci - blue collar workers turned against Unions when they realized back in the 70's early 80's that the Unions weren't working for them! Then they lapped up the bs line about "unions being part of the problem", now the sheeple have become so dumbed down that they haven't a clue about what they Unions have done for this nation!!
As for "Right to Work" laws:
"The evidence shows that these claims are completely without scientific foundation."
Just go and see how much you make in Texas or those other states that have those RTW laws on the books - see exactly how much those people are making compared to what the Union people make - they make 33% less where there are RTW laws on the books!!
Chicago has found a way to balance fiscal conservatism with unions. Both sides sit down and negotiate with full awareness of the collateral issues like taxes, automation, potential layoffs, etc. Neither side walks away from the negotiating table completely happy and that is a good thing. Other city and state governments can do the same if they want to and try. Anti-union legislation is all about political power. It is designed to load the dice against workers and in favor of business. Germany has unions, yet they have a high standard of living as well as a thriving capitalist system. American business wants the shortcut to high profits rather than work on a cooperative basis.
when does the tag" job creators" become a lie .
Rich people dont "create" jobs, demand creates jobs! it has always been a lie,
How do you create demand? you get the money to the people who will go out and spend it, not give the money to the people who will send it out of the country to their tax sheltered, Bahamian bank accounts, so they dont have to pay taxes and help the economy of their own country.
"job creators" becomes a lie when the jobs "created" are in China...
this is especially troubling when the "job creators" benefit from being in the USA, pay little or no income taxes (Exxon-Mobil comes to mind) and want more and more tax breaks... when these people scream and shout about the "fact" that 47% of the people pay no taxes... and yet somehow the top 1% now on 42 of the wealth (a figure that has at least doubled since Reagan came to power...
Shameful...
you create demand by developing a product that people want to buy.
contessa
I would say it as "You respond to demand by developing a product people want to buy"
Quite different I think. The demand already exists.
Agreed, Pat.
The problem is not creating a product that people want. Americans used to make all kinds of things that are now manufactured overseas-- clothing, cheap plastic kitchen doodads, electronics, automotive parts... and so on. The problem is that other countries bid down the cost of their labor (and they have a lower standard-- and cost-- of living) but in the USA average Americans hope for a specific wage AND they want to provide their children with the same lifestyle they enjoyed.
Unless you want the cheapest tshirts (hypothetically) to be priced at $20, rather than $5-6, OR unless you want American laborers to start working for $2 a day, this problem will persist. Company owners nearly always seek options of cutting labor costs.
People cannot buy products unless they have disposable income and are willing to spend that income on a product. Both must exist in order for sales to go up: the idea that this is an either/or debate is somewhat ludicrous. If the majority of your population does not have money to purchase your product then you product will not sell. Likewise if you do not have a product that people want to buy your product will not sell.
Many times the people do not know about the product and do not demand it until they find out about it.
......that does not negate anything I said Contessa. You cannot demand a product until you have money to purchase the product. If people do not want your product or do not have the money to purchase it, you cannot sell it. This is not an either or situation. I do not know why both liberals and conservatives insist on making this either or. If your consumer doesn't know about a product then your consumer will not demand the product. You have to create the product and then make the consumer aware and then the consumer can demand the product. They can only have demand if they have money to purchase it. This is not complicated.
It is not either or, it is both. It works both ways. Demand can be created that was not there by a new product. Businesses and entrepeneurs create new products. Demand can also create a product. You are correct. It is not either-or.
ah the contessa conundrum of which came first supply side or the Laffer curve.
Laffer curve was always there. It just needed to be discovered.
Right to work means you can work at our right price.
which wouldn`t be enough to live on
Right to work means that IF there is a job available, you have the right to apply for it. The employer may then winnow down the field of applicants in any way he/she wishes - including allowing them to bid against each other to work at a LOWER price/cost/rate than the others. Right to work means that the employer holds ALL the cards and the workers hold none of them. Right to work means that once a worker accepts a job, he/she is automatically barred from unionizing AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT. Right to work is an abuse, a travesty and a lie.
Right on!
you have the right to work, you just dont have any other rights, I lived in Florida and we used to say: "they must take the nice weather right out of your paycheck" because the same job I got paid $18/hour for up north, I was paid $10/hour for in Florida, and the ability to negotiate for more pay was non-existant
In northern Michigan, the motto of seasonal jobs is: The view of the bay is half of your pay.
I lived in florida for 16 years and it was the same thing with me. $7.00 an hour, no rights, waste of human resources and had to live with many roommates to keep a roof over my head.
The "Right to Work" is Republican code for the right to fire you for any reason including no reason at all.
I hate the term Right To Work workers have no rights. I have worked in companies that set people up to fail so they can fire them. I was a victim of that, I called an attorney that specializes in labor relations. I was told unless I was sexually harassed or could prove discrimination I had no claim. I documented what was going on and told them I was being set up to fail. The lawyer told me there was nothing I could do. Workers need rights an employer can fire you at will and at any time. Right To Work gives the employer the advantage the right for them to have you work or not work.
I just wanted to add to my comment I have never been written up and constantly get excellent reviews. I was told recently by my current employer I am a valuable asset to the company and was told that at the job where I was set up too fail and eventually fired. I do not trust any employer because no one has my back not even the HR department. Workers have no rights and that needs to change.
Arizona is a right to work state. Teachers can be fired without cause, and the 'job creators' here seem to think that you should be grateful to have ANY job, regardless of pay vs. effort. It's ridiculous.
The "job creators" LOL, think poor people should be on their knees kissing their butts because what would we all do without the rich people to take care of all the rest of us dumb worker bees?
Big money is pouring into your state in order to buy your representatives. Your Governor and Legislator at the state level are cheaper and less scrutinized than National level reps.
Keep on letting big money rule and watch "We the people" become an outdated, oh so cute, meaningless catch phrase.
Here is where the big money is coming from.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
Your site seems a little barren. There is a pac that launders funding to super pacs with the sole purpose of electing far right Governors in any and all states. Mother Jones News gave a good accounting of this but dang it all I can't find my copy right now.
Sort of like all those Soros PAC's that aren't on this list either.
Two wrongs don't make a right? Well then again they might make a right wingnut.Soros versus corporate america.Sounds fair--if you are incorporated.
All right wing radicals like Contessa can do is cite Soros, the damn billionaire with a conscience, as evil personified. Perhaps if we got away from marginalizing and dehumanizing those we disagree with we might be able to actually solve a few problems, but then that would require open minds, listening skills, and working together for a common purpose, not exactly 21st century American values. They've been replaced by ignorance, incompetence, hypocrisy, greed, selfishness, and fear of change.
Your pal Soros: "I Fancied Myself As Some Kind Of God."
I would just like to congratulate Governor Sam Brownback, Senators Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran, and Reps. Tim Huelskamp, Lynn Jenkins, Kevin Yoder, and Mike Pompeo, all of Kansas, for running Boeing and its 2100 jobs out of the state....GOOD JOB GUYS..!!!! At least you can still make it impossible in your state to obtain an legal abortion...:-)......
Don't look at it as running Boeing out of the state. Look at it the way Republicans do: They have granted 2100 people in Kansas the Right To Work. For less. A lot less. Making less money is a God-given right that Republicans always vigorously defend.
The problem is people need to stop voting for republicans they are bought by the corporations they do not represent the middle, working class or poor. They are clueless Paul Ryan said you are not poor if you live in a house with air conditioning, have a cell phone and car. I live in an apartment with AC, have a nine year old car and my cell phone is my only phone. I want Mr. Ryan to see the way I live and tell me how rich I am when he sees the size of my apartment the man needs a reality check. Better yet check out those who are unemployed and worse off then me. Yes, I am working but I do not know when I may lose my job and worse yet for what reason. I hate this feeling of not having control of my employment.
WRONG. Corporations donate equally to both parties...whichever one will have the power. Totally wrong talking point that repubs are bought by corporations....NO MORE than Dems are.
Here is your link.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/10/13/the-10-biggest-corporate-campaign-contributors-in-u-s-politics/
Wow Contessa, that is the closest you have ever come to admitting teapublicans commit the same crimes you accuse dumbocrats of....I'm impressed.
Another factor that might be skewing this is that the Bush administration did some serious tinkering with the definition of "Manufacturing."
There's a full page ad today in the New York Times that links union shops to North Korea. Talk about an unsubtle assault on unionism!
Divide and conquer is the plan of the pig. If they can force a wedge they will use it to get their own way. It soon may be time to off the pig
Right to Work means that an employer can violate any and all established norms and hire and fire at will.
Right to work means that a university can hire a non-applicant for a tenure track position (after 100 applications have been accepted, properly vetted, and 10 finalists selected) in complete violation of said university's "operations manual"...
such a university can then bestow early tenure on such a professor, even though he did not teach a single course and even though the committee that evaluated his credentials unanimously rejected him...
this university can then charge $50K per year to educate your child, because they have only the "finest" professors on staff and not any who came in through nefarious means... said university is m,y alma mater, where I went to graduate school!
On Dylan Ratigan's show today, the Republican commentator claimed that we should remove the regulations on fracking to create thousands of jobs in upstate New York. This just shows how out of touch Republicans are. Deregulation is what has put this nation into the horrible position we are in. It now appears another earthquake, now in Ohio was just caused by fracking. Republicans love to claim that this nation has higher taxes than anywhere else but that is simply false. We actually have some of the lowest. Additionally 1/3 of corporations and billionaires pay zero in both federal and state taxes and actually get our taxpayer money in payment for their poor services and shipment of our jobs and factories overseas. This nation is rated somewhere around 37th in the developed world now for quality of roads, bridges, airports, water pipes, sewer systems etc. That's shameful! If we want to create jobs screw these polluting frackers! Make them pay the taxes EVERY WORKING AMERICAN pays and start putting people to work re-building the infrastructure these very corporations (and us) use to make their huge profits. The unadulterated greed, selfishness and arrogance of these Republicans is not only insulting it is unpatriotic and borders on treasonous.
Earthquake caused by fracking??? link please.
800 billion in Obama's stimulus funding with only 6% going toward infrastrucute. Shameful
Here's several links...
There are many more. Just type 'Ohio earthquake caused by fracking' into search engine.
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=ohio-earthquake-likely-c...
news.yahoo.com/ohio-earthquake-likely-caused-fracking-...
csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0102/How-fracking-caused-a...
There was a lot of Obama's stimulus money going towards infrastructure improvements like the NJ-NY tunnel that was already under construction but the Republican Governor of NJ simply shut it down refusing the funds and killing the jobs to try to discredit Obama. Similarly the stimulus funds for high speed rail in Fl were turned down by that Republican Governor again killing tens of thousands of jobs for the same reason. These are just two examples and these are private sector jobs. The Republicans Governors and legislators killed over a half million state government jobs this last year.
This IS SHAMEFUL. Especially when you consider the NJ Governor's killing of a job in progress, and the FL Governors killing of the high speed rail. All of Europe, Japan and even China has high speed rail. Only we don't have this modern technology. China just Ok'd a new 500 km per hour train. But the Republicans keep killing the high speed rail plans here as they have for 30 years. We are going backward in this country because of the Republican party.
....because Republicans in the Senate and House did not want money to be spent on infrastructure. The original bill called for almost double the amount that ended up getting spent and that amount was watered down to get compromise from Republicans.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2012/01/05/ohio-christmas-quakes-likely-caused-by-fracking/
http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2012/01/05/1
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009010530/what-do-republicans-want-warmed-over-bush-economics
I rode the Japanese "Bullet Train" in 1964, forty-eight years ago. They are way ahead of us, and are continuing to improve their infrastructure.
Forty-eight years ago. LBJ was our president. The year of the Civil Rights Act.
Frankly, if the republicans were completely in power, we would watch the infrastructure that our great-grand and grandparents and parents paid taxes to build - and even help build - fall apart completely. This country would plummet into a fifth world country very quickly. Many conservatives would strip log, strip mine and strip just to strip and claim that they have created jobs. For how long? ten years? twenty? It takes a tree 25 years to grow to a size that is loggable. I don't think oil replenishes itself in 25 years - 250 million maybe if there is enough biomass to make oil deposits. If one goes solely by the republican dictum of how to create jobs (drill, baby, drill, war for oil and other valuable minerals, TSA and militarized police) every single person in the US would be jobless, penniless, and freedomless (I know, not a word) in less that 50 years.
Don't bother contessa with facts, particularly if they interfere with crony capitalist economic theory.
As many have noted, RTW really means Right to Fire for any or no reason whatsoever. It takes away all the power from the employee. I live in a RTW state. What most people don't think about until it happens to them is that it also makes it next to impossible to draw unemployment benefits when you get fired, the companies here will always fight it, and usually win. I have seen it over and over again.
Okay. This is a short post. BOTH of these charts are statistically meaningless, 100% meaningless. Not 50%, or 8%, 100% bullcrap. EVEN IF the data is accurate, the chart is bullcrap.
2 years ago I didn't know this. Now I do. If you read the following link, and understand what you read, you'll know it too. Neither Maddow nor her staff are aware of this meaning. Sadly. Neither are any Republicans (I don't read enough Democrat propaganda to claim they are equally as ignorant, but the odds are good that they are as ignorant.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_and_enumerative_statistical_studies
In case you're unsure what the implications are:
Quizzes, tests, and letter grades in school are meaningless, misleading, and destroy self-esteem in return for less than nothing.
We should tip 'before' we receive our service, instead of afterwards.
Merit pay increases are fundamentally flawed in EVERY way, always.
If you disagree with these three statements, you didn't read, or, didn't grasp the above material.
Critiques are welcome. But not by those who haven't read the above link. (grasping it is optional)
I think you are the one who isn't understanding what your link is saying. It is not that the charts are meaningless or bullcrap at all. It depends wholly upon what action one takes. Unfortunately, we cannot take that action ourselves we can only suggest that action to our lawmakers/authority figures unless we run for office and then influence the collective.
Merit pay has been proven to work in many cultures/circumstances over and over again for hundreds of years. Opinions are just that, opinions. If you don't believe in merit pay than I think you should definitely tell the executives that they deserve the exact same pay as every other employee.
The top chart is very misleading. Comparing the actual number of jobs created from 2009 to 2011 does not account for the fact that the size of the manufacturing workforce in Indiana is about 500,000 and in North Dakota it is only 25,000. This should be shown as a percent of the workforce.
I disagree. The comparisons are invalid, utterly meaningless for reasons I stated above.
W. Edwards Deming provides eloquent explanation of why merit pay is fundamentally flawed.
But the link above, which you did not read, explains in some detail who enumerative data, on which merit pay is based, CANNOT show causal links. This means, when we evaluate, executives or line employees, or students, our evaluations are taken to be 100% indicative, when in reality the worker/student is roughly 8% responsible for the outcome of their work. Always.
Deming (management guru responsible for the success of Japan as an economic power), and Kohn (education guru advocating removal of letter grades for hte same reason), both explain, in their own but similar ways, why merit pay is anathema to common sense.
Deming
http://curiouscat.com/deming/performanceappraisal.cfm
Kohn
http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/meritpay.htm
Not everyone can grasp the enumerative data thing. It's a little tricky. But no one who has not read it, can understand it.
The second chart in this article is also very misleading. For example, there are four "free bargaining" states that have a higher % job loss over this period than does North Carolina and Mississippi. Also what is not shown is that the 8 states with the lowest job loss were all right to work states. In fact three of these had a job increase over the period.
RIGHT TO WORK? If you'll do it for slave wages and no benefits, you might get a job. Before she died in 1994, my sister was working in restaurants in IDAHO, a RTW state, for $1.95 an hour, and tips WERE DEDUCTED. When she switched to dishwasher for the same wage with no tips or deductions, she was standing in wetness for 8 to 10 hour shifts. An independent woman, Kate should not have died at age 61. I believe RTW helped her a few steps closer to her grave.
Union member (laidoff), raised by union employed parents (retired)...that being said....some argue that RTW is bad because it lowers the standards presently received, including wages/benefits etc...basically giving the employer a chance to make even more money per hour worked per employee...do you really think that the overall bids for jobs will decrease by the amount saved on hourly wages? Or the growth in number of workers employed on project by wage reductions? If you do I am shocked you can even read this post! You should go back to the pharmacy and double your script of Zanax, aiding your eased grip of reality! On the other hand, a decrease in hourly wages, same quality and production rate, will allow Unions to be more competitive with non-union companies, therefore increasing the amount of projects gained by RTW. You believe that? In a perfect world that sounds like a fair trade! REALLY! Steady work at a lower pay scale (benefits retained) vs being laid off or having to travel across the country in search of work, away from the reasons we go to work on a daily basis, at our current wages (benefits placed under seasonal restrictions). Locally, I earn $32/hr, potentially $50/hr (double that with overtime) in areas like Chicago or Boston if work is available for travelers...not bad, esp if overtime is offered! Downside, Ive been laidoff for 4 months this year, collecting unemployment while my neighbor works daily with a local contractor, year round, because he/she does what the boss asks, a puppet, kissing ass, cutting throats and short of Union quality worksmanship...hey, itll work and its done faster! Damned if you do, damned if you dont, right? Is there a middle ground that can be established? Politicians claim they have the answer...oh bull@!$%#, PACS and lobbying groups tell them what the answer is, always for the benefit of the majority of those represented! LMFAO Riddle me this.....why doesnt the govt implement a law "MTS" Mandatory To Stay, in the US, employed with US workers (not illegals), using US materials, TRULY helping aid the greater good of the masses! Why are we wasting our time bitching about RTW when we should be focused on the solution! Import/export is a necessity but not of companies employing thousands moving to Mexico or using foreign goods a vast majority of the time......its cheaper, sure, but at a cost to overall quality from the ore its derived from to the labor that installs for intended use (training and procedural applications)! Conclusion: enact and enforce RTW.....its not going to change a damn thing but lower the income earned of those who are fortunate enough (heavy moral dilemmas omitted). The only thing that will help is to force companies/corporations to stay within the confines of OUR borders, manned by OUR citizens, using OUR resources! Till then, see you in the unemployment line or in the search of another career.... Ive rambled, yes and i apologize if this offends you, no not really, screw you and being politically correct! Thats another issue needing revision...Fear of scrutiny or others feelings/opinions , if you dont like it you dont have to be around or subject yourself or others in your charge....just like I dont have to give two @!$%#s about your standing, you dont have to follow my lead!
Caveat Emptor is what you young folks are going to have to live with. You've lost the social safety net, you've lost the first amendment protections and you've lost lives of meaning and dignity in return for being secure against muslims, competitive economic theories, and a lower standard of living than your grandparents have. Welcome to 21st century USA, the heaviest armed 3rd world country on the planet.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20110203/1astandardofliving03_cv.art.htm
i listen to all these experts on right to work most of them havent a clue as to what it means i am going to enlighten you right to work deals with the union construction industry u have to be union to belong to my union which is the united brotherhood of carpenters and joiners of america established in the year of our lord 1881 it doesnt deal with anything that doesnt belong to the building trades i have been in 40yrs i am retired when i worked it was cold, hot wet snowy, and icy we lost a lot of hours a year due to inclimate weather this was my choice i nwouldnt want to do anything else we do foundations of big and small buildings we do pile driving in most of the country we do bridges, power houses we do road work to a degree we also have millwrights in our union who do conveyers, set motors, rework turbines in generatingf power houses for your electric our people go thru apprenticeship programs including college cources, we havw a big training center in vegas to train certain aspects of our trade we have college graduates we are very skilled to do our work we are very proud of our accomplishments. we make a good living there is something else u dont know the difference between a union contractor and a non-union contractor is the union contractor pays is employees a good wage the non union contractor makes all the money he gives peanuts to the workers we have a retirement non union have a 401k which isnt a retirement that is your money going into the 401k we also have good ins but we pay big for it my in s doubled in 7yrs of my retirement my retirement does not go up no cost of living nothing i pay for my insurance out of my retirement u non union scabs hate us because we stand together u cant do that they will fire you but we help keep your standard of living you may not agree with us but u know it is true