Waring Finke, the local lefty columnist for the West Bend Daily News, has penned a column opposing right to work in Wisconsin. It is perfectly acceptable for him to hold and espouse this opinion. What is not acceptable is for him to spread misinformation in his column as a means of misleading his readers on this topic.
Finke’s column includes two statements that are easily proven false. Here is the first:
Twenty-four states have enacted RTW laws in one form or another and not one has created a job or protected a current one.
This is false. In fact, states with right to work have grown jobs much faster than states without it – especially in industries dominated by unions:
Meanwhile, private employment has grown 4.9% in right-to-work states over the past three years, versus 3.9% in other states, according to an analysis of Labor Department data. This disparity is particularly stark in the factory sector: Manufacturing employment has grown 4.1% in right-to-work states over the past three years, compared with less than 3% in other states. Meanwhile, factory jobs pay 7.4% less in right-to-work states.
The economy is a dynamic thing and RTW is only a contributing component to the trend, but the data is clear that it does contribute positively to job growth.
Here is Finke’s second false statement, which is much closer to a lie:
If you do go to work in a union shop, you cannot be required to join the union as a condition of becoming employed. If you join the union and choose to pay dues…
The first sentence is true. In Wisconsin, workers can opt out of joining the union if they work for a unionized shop. What they are prohibited by law from doing is opting out of paying dues. So the operative word is in his next sentence. If you work in a union shop, you must pay dues to the union whether you join or not. Workers do not get to “choose to pay dues.” In fact, that is exactly what RTW seeks to do – give workers that choice. Finke paints the false picture that workers already have that choice. They do not.
It is a good sign that the other side of this debate knows their argument is weak if they feel the need to obfuscate the truth in an attempt to bolster their side.
Just a minor distinction with a minor difference: dues are for members only. Unless it has changed, the nonmembers pay “Fair Share.” It goes to the same place and is the same cost but “Fair Share” payers are not members and therefore aren’t paying membership dues.
Fair point. “Fair share” are merely dues by another name.
Yes and no. Costs are the same and Union uses them the same perhaps but a “Fair Sharer” has no say or vote in the union. Its why I joined rather than “fair shared” the TA union in grad school. Had to pay anyway, might as well get a vote and the beer at the meetings.
You just proved Owen’s point, dumbass.
You can opt out of the union, but you have to pay dues. You could call it rainbow unicorn shit, but it’s still dues.
If you’re this much of a moron, then you’re better off having someone do your negotiating.
Boyd McBoyd – not really sure where your anger comes from or what you think it adds to the polite conversation Owen and I were having. Calling me an idiot and dumbass reflect poorly on you, not me. You’d do well to know something about me before using ridiculous attacks for no reason. The difference between dues and fair share is subtle as I said but it is real; it is also (for now) defined in state statute.
You were called a moron, not an idiot. An idiot is someone with an IQ of 0-25, whereas a moron has an IQ of 51-70. Seeing you can manage to type without rubbing shit in your hair, I gave you the benefit of the doubt. Now I see I was too generous. Mea culpa.
Back to the point at hand, you’re arguing semantics. Whether you choose to opt out of the union or join, an amount of X dollars is still taken from you check and given to a union. You can call it fair share, newborn puppies, or rainbow unicorn shit, but it’s still X dollars going to a union. It’s “heads I win, tails you lose.” There’s no downside for the union — they get their money regardless with or without having someone join. Where’s their incentive to provide the best possible service to its members?
Stay Classy Boyd. Stay classy.
Can’t refute my correct points, so you drag out a line from a horrid decade-old film.
Dumb people must hang out with you so they look smarter.