By Beverly Goldberg, The Century Foundation, November 9, 2006
10 Nov 2006 // The power shift in Congress and the passage by six states of ballot measures raising minimum wage levels by $1 to $1.70 an hour and indexing them to inflation indicates that the time is right for American workers to push for changes in the anti-union attitudes that have dominated the halls of power in our nation’s capitol, making it harder and harder for workers to achieve and hold onto a middle-class life.
This anti-unionism runs so deep that it has even affected the Department of Labor, which was once a supporter of fair labor practices. As the Washington Post noted in March 2006, Lynn Gibson, a public affairs aide who was supposed to be focusing on alerting people to training opportunities, had sent out e-mails directing people to Unionfacts.com, an anti-union Web site. Moreover, the nonprofit Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics has revealed a relationship between Elaine Chao, head of the Department of Labor, and Rick Berman, an industry lobbyist and founder of Center for Union Facts, a virulently anti-union organization.
The pervasiveness of anti-unionism in the administration was also evident in the National Labor Relations Board ruling in early October, which reclassified millions of workers as supervisors, thereby making them ineligible for union membership. The board is composed of three Republicans and two Democrats, who strongly opposed the decision.
Another example of anti-unionism is the right-to-work laws in twenty-two states. These laws make it illegal for businesses to deny a person employment because of membership or non-membership in a union, but at the same time, regulations mandate that when a company employs both union and nonunion members, the unions must represent nonmember employees (who do not pay the dues that go to the costs of union negotiations and services), even when it comes to expensive litigation against the company. By forcing unions to provide this benefit to nonunion members, right-to-work states discourage unions from even trying to organize in their jurisdictions.
The costs to workers of residing in right-to-work states is significant. In right-to-work states, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “an average worker earns about $7,131 a year less than workers in free bargaining states ($30,656 versus $37,787).” This is in line with another finding reported by the Center for Policy Alternatives: “Across the nation, union members earn $9,308 a year more than nonunion members ($41,652 versus $32,344).”
By preventing unionization, these states not only benefit businesses already in their borders but provide them with ammunition to tempt businesses to relocate. Looking at the Web sites of some cities in right-to-work states makes this absolutely clear. For example, the Charlotte [North Carolina] Regional Partnership, proclaims that “Boasting a population over 2.2 million, a regional unemployment rate around 4% and a workforce 1.2 million strong, the Charlotte Region offers a skilled, low-union labor force in both rural and urban settings. World-class companies such as Bank of America, Wachovia, Duke Energy, Goodrich, General Dynamics and Lowe's have benefited tremendously from the competitive regional workforce.” In the same vein, Stillwater, Oklahoma, points out that it is a particularly good place for businesses because “Oklahoma’s 15.9% unionization rate places it 33% lower than the national average. None of Stillwater’s manufacturing operations is organized.”
It is interesting that North Carolina ranks fortieth among states in median income and Oklahoma forty-third. In fact, when examining the Census Bureau’s chart of median household incomes over the years 2002–2004, one finds that only one of the ten top states is a right-to work state, and that one is Virginia, which is home to much of the aerospace industry, with its skilled workers, and which serves as the bedroom community for many employed by the federal government in nearby Washington, D.C. On the other hand, eighteen of the right-to-work states fall within the lowest half of the chart, with six of the bottom ten in income being right-to-work states.
In addition, as also noted by the Center for Policy Alternatives, “the rate of workplace deaths is 41 percent higher in states with Right-to-Work laws. And injured workers in those states have fewer benefits to help them recover physically and financially. In 1996, workers compensation benefits were 50 percent lower in Right-to-Work states than in free bargaining states.”
It clearly is in the best interests of workers to fight to repeal these laws. There have been some attempts to do so, most notably in Idaho and Oklahoma, but they have not succeeded. With growing public awareness of the increasing inequality in America and the indication that the populace is awake to the need for change, the time may be right for such a fight.
Beverly Goldberg, a Senior Fellow and Editor-at-Large at The Century Foundation, is the author of Age Works: What Corporate America Must Do to Survive the Graying of the Workforce(Free Press) and coauthor of Corporation on a Tightrope(Oxford University Press).