Panel discussion: ''Right to Work: Right or Wrong for Michigan''

By Steve Thorpe Legal News Last month, Indiana became the 23rd state to allow unionized workers to stop paying dues, once again bringing the debate to the forefront. Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, calling the issue ''divisive,'' has repeatedly said he wants to defer talk about a possible ''Right to Work Law'' in Michigan. That didn't discourage four experts from conducting a lively and blunt dialogue on the subject. The panel discussion ''Right to Work: Right or Wrong for Michigan'' was hosted Thursday, March 1, at the Wayne State University Law School by members of the Federalist Society. Dennis Devaney, a former member of the National Labor Relations Board, acted as moderator. The panelists opposed to a Right to Work Law in Michigan included state Rep. Vicki Barnett, D-Farmington Hills and Democratic Whip, and Prof. Roland Zullo of U-M's Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations. The panelists in favor were Stan Greer, Senior Research Associate at National Institute for Labor Relations, and Rep. Mike Shirkey (R-Clarklake). Each participant was given an equal opportunity to state their views and a question and answer period with the audience followed. During their individual presentations, speakers agreed that there are both individual rights aspects and economic aspects to the debate. ''I certainly want to address some of the economic claims that have been made about Right to Work by opponents,'' said Greer. ''But for us at the Right to Work organizations the primary issue is not improving a state's business climate, it's a fundamental issue of freedom and equality under the law.'' Zullo disagreed, saying ''I invite you to go to the National Right to Work Foundation website and read their stuff. I think what leaps out at you is quite transparent. They just don't like unions.'' Shirkey also supported the individual right aspect. ''I call it 'labor freedom,' where unions are as free to make their case as workers are to make their choice.'' But he went on to stress the second aspect, too. ''There are two dimensions to this issue: The dimension of freedom and liberty and the dimension of economic opportunity.'' To forcefully bring home the economic facet, he started his segment by asking for a show of hands of how many audience members know someone who is unemployed, underemployed or has been forced to leave the state to find work. A majority of hands went up. ''Virtually everyone in this room raised their hand and I believe nearly everyone in Michigan would raise their hand,'' Shirkey said. ''We don't have enough jobs in Michigan,'' Shirkey added. '' We don't have enough opportunities in Michigan. We don't have enough investment in Michigan.'' Zullo believes that the economic advantages of Right to Work are overstated. ''When businesses are surveyed and asked why they chose a certain location, Right to Work comes in very low in terms of priority,'' he said. ''Many other factors come before that, such as the education of the workforce, proximity to resources and subsidies offered by a state. We shouldn't think about it as an economic development tool.'' Shirkey strongly disagreed, saying ''We don't have enough jobs here and that's because there's not enough investment in Michigan. We must aggressively eliminate obstacles to investing in Michigan.'' He went on to talk about is conversations with site selection businesses, which help companies decide where to locate. ''I've had the opportunity recently to talk to site selection folks across the nation. I randomly selected site selection firms, called them cold, gave them my name and simply asked them the question, 'When in the conversation with your clients does the topic of Right to Work come up?' He then cited multiple companies he claims reject non-right to work states ''without further consideration.'' Barnett argued that potential employees do have a choice. ''You have freedom of choice and you can exercise it,'' Barnett said. ''If you don't want to work for an employer because there's a union, you are under no obligation to work there.'' Both Zullo and Barnett stressed that unions can't function without funds. ''What Right to Work laws are really about is trying to cripple unions financially,'' Zullo said''So here in Michigan the question becomes, do we want a union movement in this state and how strong do we want it to be?'' He likened mandatory union dues to the taxes citizens pay for public services. The U of M guy used an example dear to his heart. ''Even people who come up from Ohio to root for the wrong football team don't have to pay to use our roads.'' ''If we want to have public schools, if we want the garbage picked up, if we want all these 'collective goods,' you have to tax and taxes are inherently coercive,' Zullo continued. ''In a sense, the dues union members pay is a tax. If you take away the ability for a union to 'tax,' you disable the union financially.'' According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Michigan has about 671,000 union members, or about 17 percent of all workers. That ranks Michigan number five in the U.S. in percentage of union workers. A number of unions, including the United Auto Workers, gathered last week in Washington, D.C., to strategize on slowing or stopping the spread of ''Right to Work'' laws. They announced they will attempt to gather 500,000 signatures to put the issue before voters in November. Published: Thu, Mar 15, 2012

––––––––––––––––––––
 Subscribe to the Legal News!
 https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available