Benefits of Liberty in Right to Work States,  by Roger Howard

Benefits of Liberty in Right to Work States, by Roger Howard

Published: Mar 16, 2013 at 6:21 pm

A recently published letter to the editor of this paper, The Daily Local News (PA), By Al Martino of Oxford would lead readers to believe that there are fewer job opportunities, lower wages, insufficient benefits and slower economic growth in right-to-work States than in States with compulsory union dues.  This is false. Studies of the 2001 – 2011 decade by the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Labor show that private job growth was 12% in right-to-work States versus 3.0% in compulsory unionism States.  Real growth in private sector compensation also rose 12% vs. 3%.  The number of people with private health insurance increased by 1.2% in right-to-work States whereas it decreased by 6% in compulsory unionism States such as Pennsylvania. Growth in real manufacturing GDP was 33% in right-to-work States vs. 24% in compulsory unionism States.

These U.S. government studies demonstrate that there are more job opportunities, better wage and benefit growth and greater economic development in right-to-work States.  Compulsory unionism results not in job growth, but in larger welfare rolls: Welfare recipients at the end of the decade were 7 per thousand citizens in right to work States, but 18 per thousand in compulsory unionism States.

Population growth in the 25 to 34 age group was 11.2% in right-to-work States and 0.7% in compulsory unionism States.  This statistic says that is most probable that your children and grand children will have to leave this State in order to support their families.

Mr. Martino opines that unions represent the middle class.  That is not true either.  Unions represent the political goals of union leadership.  They do not represent the majority of the middle class who must earn the wages to pay the taxes to subsidize compulsory unionism in their governments and school districts.  Tens of millions of dollars of union dues collected in Pennsylvania do not benefit middle class union workers in Pennsylvania; they are spent in other States to advance union leaders’ agendas in those States.

We are watching to see if our elected public servants will vote to improve economic growth and opportunity in Pennsylvania rather than to please union leadership whose contribution of millions of dollars swells the campaign coffers of politicians.

Roger Howard

Printed in The Daily Local News on Monday, March 11, 2013