Right To Work - Lies You've Been Told - Welcome to Homepage of

The Facts behing the so called "Right to Work"

Does a "Right-to-Work" law guarantee me a job or the "right" to a job?
No. "Right-to-Work" laws have nothing to do with creating or providing jobs for workers?

Does a "Right-to-Work" law protect me from losing my job?
No. Indiana is an "at-will" employment state which means that you can be fired for any reason or no reason.

So, under "at-will" employment my employer can fire me for no reason and the "Right-to-Work" law does nothing to stop this?
Correct. A "Right-to-Work" law does not guarantee any right to "work" nor does it stop an employer from firing you under the at-will doctrine.

Do "Right-to-Work" laws affect wages and benefits?
Yes. The real data shows that once "Right to Work" laws are enacted, they lower wages and benefits for all workers. Workers in "Right-to-Work" states earn far less then their counterparts in Non-Right-to-Work states. It's the same effect with benefits. For more information take a look a these reports

Do so-called "Right-to-Work" laws promote new industries and economic development?
No. Companies locate in a state for many reasons. If a company does consider locating in a state because of a "Right-to-Work" law, it's because of lower wages and benefits. Purposely enacting laws to lower wages and benefits for all workers in order to lure low-paying jobs to the state is not a sound economic plan for Indiana or any other state. Indiana should have a sound economic plan that includes providing high wage jobs with good benefits for working families.

But won't a "Right-to-Work" law improve a state's overall business climate?
No. In fact, it has the opposite effect. It will create a climate in which businesses will increase profits because of lower wages but that's not good for the state or its workers. When wages fall, state revenues from income tax and sales tax fall as well. That means the state has far less funding available to finance education, transportation, and other programs that are vital to attracting new industries and businesses.

In 2010, Area Development magazine ranked the top 10 states for site selection based on survey of site selection industry consultants nIndiana ranked number 6 out of 10. The survey revealed 8 main criteria used by consultants to determine site location selection None of the 8 criteria mention RTW

In 2010, Chief Executive magazine polled 600 U.S. CEOs about site selection criteria. Criteria were grouped and rated as follows:Tax and regulation; workforce quality; living environment.
Under "workforce quality" the 5 most important items were: Employee work ethic; general education level of workforce; competitiveness of wage rates; employees cooperative relationship with management; availability of labor with specialized skills
RTW was not a factor in site location selection as education of workforce was cited as the most important factor in site selection
If it was really a jobs creator won't more states pass  "Right-to-Work" laws?
Correct. Most states passed  "Right-to-Work" laws during 1947-1959. The last state to pass this law was Oklahoma in 2001.

What is a so called "Right-to-Work" Law?
It's a loophole created under Section 14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) that allows a state to enact a law prohibiting union security clauses in union contracts. It was enacted as part of the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, a major anti-worker overhaul of Federal labor law pushed through by the 80th Congress despite a veto by President Harry Truman. It is worth noting that this was the first Republican controlled Congress since 1932.

What is a union security clause?
A union security clause requires all workers who receive the benefits of a collective bargaining agreement (also called a union contract) to share the costs of the administration of that agreement. A "Right-to-Work" law prohibits a union security clause thus creating a "Right-to-Freeload" law.

Can workers be forced to join a union before getting a job?
No. Under Federal law no one can be forced to join a union before getting a job. That's called a "closed shop" and has been illegal under the National Labor Relations Act for years.

The "Right-to-Work" supporters keep talking about "compulsory" unionism. Do all workers have to be union members when there is a union security clause in a contract?
No. "Compulsory" unionism is a boogeyman created by folks with an anti-worker agenda. Again, under Federal law workers can never be forced to join a union even when there is a union security clause in the contract. This has been part of the law for years.

Read the Case: NLRB v. General Motors Corp., 373 U.S. 734 (1963)

Can workers be "forced" to pay for union political activities?
No Once again, under federal law workers can never be forced to pay dues to union for anything other than the direct collective bargaining that benefits that person.

Read the Case: Communications Workers v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988)

Why are the Indiana GOP legislators and Governor pushing so hard on to pass this so quickly?
Many reason, most indepedent critical political commentators cite political retribution to the unions who primarly support Democrats. The other primarly cited reason is payback to political donors, in this case corporations, in-state, out of state, both foreign and domestic.

Editorials and political commentators examples
Kokomo Perspective
Brian Howey
PHYSORG.com

Why are the union members protesting so ?
They realize that passage of this bill will financial ruin smaller independent unions and drain the necessary resources for bargaining. Right to Work would allow members not to pay dues but recieve the representation and the benefits of a dues paying member. In other words, Right to Work give people the right to freeload. The union must by national law represent that non paying employee with dues paying members money. It would be the equivalent of someone coming to your home getting the food, clothing, and shelter paid for by you. The Indiana and local Chambers of Commerce won't allow you to join without paying your dues but yet they advocate that unions should be required to do so under this law.

They've also researched the facts and know that Right to Work states have lower standards of living due to loss of pay and benefits. Many right to work states have statistics on health care (child death, worker death, higher rates of diseases, etc) that are worse than third world countries. We live in a consumer-based society, for our economic engine to run, workers need disposable income to spend. Lowering wages in order to compete for more low wages jobs is a precription for economic disaster.

So, what about the reports from the National Institute for Labor Relations Research (NILRR) that the "Right-to-Work" supporters distribute about increased economic development in states with "Right-to-Work" laws?
The National Institute for Labor Relations Research (NILRR) is an arm of the National Right-to-Work Committee and they have an anti-union political agenda. Further, many people have raised serious questions and doubts about their research methodology. There are many reports available from reliable sources that completely contradict the NILRR. If you see other reports from Right to Work supporters, look to see if they're quoting data from the NILRR.

What is the National Right-to-Work Committee (NRTWC)?
It is an anti-union, special interest, out-of-state organization based in Virginia. It is one of the largest special interest groups behind these so called "Right-to-Work" laws. It has an anti-union agenda and raises a lot of money to wage war against unions all over the country which, in turn, lowers wages for all workers.
There are actually three branches of the National Right to Work Committee even though they don't appear to be the same organization. Additionally, they set-up or advise state "Right to Work" committees. The three NRTWC branches are:

2003 gross receipts for the National Right-to-Work Legal Defense Foundation (NRTWLDF) were over 11 million dollars. It is very well funded. Since technically it is a 501(c)(3) "public charity" organization, its IRS Form 990 is available to the public. Take a look:

Whose interests are they really fighting for? The funding trail that exists points to anti-union businesses:

A lawsuit revealed that 84 percent of the National Right to Work Committee’s 1973 budget was funded by corporations, and other employers.
Early known donors include:

Wofford Camp who served on a U.S. Chamber of Commerce committee and was a California grower who fought efforts by farm workers to organize unions.
Roger Milliken, former president of Milliken & Company, who shut down one of his southern textile plants as retaliation against his employees’ vote to form a union.
The Foundation bragged that “over 350 Presidents and Chairmen of the Board listed in Dun & Bradstreet’s Directory of Million Dollar Corporations,” were associated with it.
Anti-union companies indirectly fund National Right to Work through foundations. The network has received major grants from the Walton Family Foundation (funded with profits from Wal-Mart), Castle Rock Foundation (funded with profits from Coors beer), and Publix Super Markets Charities.

The group’s original leadership also suggests an anti-union agenda shaped by the interest of employers. For instance, the Committee’s first chairman of the board was Edwin Dillard, president of Old Dominion Box Company, who vehemently fought his workers’ efforts to organize his company’s plants in the South. Fred Hartley, the Committee’s first president, was the former Congressman who sponsored the Taft-Hartley Act amending the National Labor Relations Act to expand employers’ rights, not workers.

Right-to-Work Information Links