Boeing, unions, and the right to work

Wiseacre

Retired USAF Chief
Apr 8, 2011
6,025
1,298
48
San Antonio, TX
In today's WSJ, there's an op-ed by Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore concerning the Flap about Boeing thrying to build a new plant in South Carolina, a right to work state. You probably know the specifics by now, but the column points out some interesting things:

As of now there are 22 right to work states and 28 that are not. From 2000-2009 the rtw states have grown faster than their counterparts in virtually every aspect: 54.6% to 41.1% in gross state product, 53.3% to 40.6% in personal income, 11.9% to 6.1% in population, 4.1% to -0.6% in payrolls.

A 2010 study in the CATO Journal reports that between 2000 and 2008 4.8 million people have moved from a forced-union to a rtw state. And the rtw states had a 23% higher growth rate in per capita income.

Employers move out of forced-union states for other reasons besides payrolls - like avoiding having to deal with intrusive union rules, the threat of costly union stoppages, lawsuits, paying part of worker salaries and wages to union fat cats, and so on. Didja know that the last work stoppage at Bowing cost the company a billion dollars?

Seems to me a worker should have the right to unionize and get collective bargaining rights. Private unions that is. But they should also have the right to opt out and/or not pay dues if they don't like how their money is being spent, or don't want to pay dues at all.



Boeing and the Union Berlin Wall - WSJ.com
 
You're preaching to the choir. With all of the legal protections workers have now, unions are an anachronism. We probably have more lawyers now than union folks.
 
By having "right to work", you keep the unions honest. I don't want any unions giving my dues to politicians of any political party. Not having right to work laws is what liberals want. Then they can cry when their jobs go overseas from their own policies, but instead will blame those greedy republican corporotists. They're dumber than a monkey fuckin' a racoon.
 
Competition is a major factor here, as it is with capitalism in general.

Unions demand their wages, while non-union workers wages are based on supply and demand principals.

So of course the states that have an option are doing better because the wages aren't loony and are actually based on economics.

In the non-right to work states union labor is extremely expensive hence the products they manufacture cost more.
 
Competition is a major factor here, as it is with capitalism in general.

Unions demand their wages, while non-union workers wages are based on supply and demand principals.

So of course the states that have an option are doing better because the wages aren't loony and are actually based on economics.

In the non-right to work states union labor is extremely expensive hence the products they manufacture cost more.

Correct. And as a matter of course? Gubmint tends to SIDE with the Socialistics of the UNIONS...and pays them handsomely for it for support of politicians.
 
Competition is a major factor here, as it is with capitalism in general.

Unions demand their wages, while non-union workers wages are based on supply and demand principals.

So of course the states that have an option are doing better because the wages aren't loony and are actually based on economics.

In the non-right to work states union labor is extremely expensive hence the products they manufacture cost more.

Correct. And as a matter of course? Gubmint tends to SIDE with the Socialistics of the UNIONS...and pays them handsomely for it for support of politicians.

Yep...

The democrats favor the unions and the unions pay them back with votes.

Its crazy...
 
Competition is a major factor here, as it is with capitalism in general.

Unions demand their wages, while non-union workers wages are based on supply and demand principals.

So of course the states that have an option are doing better because the wages aren't loony and are actually based on economics.

In the non-right to work states union labor is extremely expensive hence the products they manufacture cost more.

Correct. And as a matter of course? Gubmint tends to SIDE with the Socialistics of the UNIONS...and pays them handsomely for it for support of politicians.

Yep...

The democrats favor the unions and the unions pay them back with votes.

Its crazy...

Not only crazy...but coercion, money laundering...and ILLEGAL.
 
Correct. And as a matter of course? Gubmint tends to SIDE with the Socialistics of the UNIONS...and pays them handsomely for it for support of politicians.

Yep...

The democrats favor the unions and the unions pay them back with votes.

Its crazy...

Not only crazy...but coercion, money laundering...and ILLEGAL.

Of course, but no one cares..

All that nonsense is slowly going to come to an end now that republicans are more libertarian oriented.
 
In today's WSJ, there's an op-ed by Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore concerning the Flap about Boeing thrying to build a new plant in South Carolina, a right to work state. You probably know the specifics by now, but the column points out some interesting things:

As of now there are 22 right to work states and 28 that are not. From 2000-2009 the rtw states have grown faster than their counterparts in virtually every aspect: 54.6% to 41.1% in gross state product, 53.3% to 40.6% in personal income, 11.9% to 6.1% in population, 4.1% to -0.6% in payrolls.

A 2010 study in the CATO Journal reports that between 2000 and 2008 4.8 million people have moved from a forced-union to a rtw state. And the rtw states had a 23% higher growth rate in per capita income.

Employers move out of forced-union states for other reasons besides payrolls - like avoiding having to deal with intrusive union rules, the threat of costly union stoppages, lawsuits, paying part of worker salaries and wages to union fat cats, and so on. Didja know that the last work stoppage at Bowing cost the company a billion dollars?

Seems to me a worker should have the right to unionize and get collective bargaining rights. Private unions that is. But they should also have the right to opt out and/or not pay dues if they don't like how their money is being spent, or don't want to pay dues at all.



Boeing and the Union Berlin Wall - WSJ.com

In this fray? Government has NO RIGHT to tell a Private entity where they can conduct business...It's that simple.
 
I have a general question-

let us suppose for a moment that the Boeing board decided to close all operations in Washington and move it all to SC, why should this be against the law?
 
I love when Conservatives call for government regulation of private contracts....

I think I see your point, but can you expound a bit?

"Right to work" laws are laws that forbid companies and unions from agreeing that all employees become members of the union.

A perfect example of the government stepping in, and interfering in the free market.
 
I have a general question-

let us suppose for a moment that the Boeing board decided to close all operations in Washington and move it all to SC, why should this be against the law?

It shouldn't. I'm about as pro-labor as you can get, and I think this shit with Boeing and the unions is bullshit. Boeing can open a factory wherever they want.

I think all "right to work" laws should be overthrown, but they're the law right now and the NLRB are acting like petulant children.
 
Last edited:
I love when Conservatives call for government regulation of private contracts....

And who is calling for government?

Not me...

Government can go fuck off.....

What exactly do you think "Right to work" laws are?

They're government interference in the market.

Of course Union States where you MUST join the Union to be hired is not any interference right? You do realize that in 28 States such laws exist. In those States one does not even get hired EVER to a Union shop unless the Union approves it. Ohh they play semantics and claim things like you have 6 weeks or 6 months to join. But the reality is if it is a Union shop no one not already selected and approved by that Union ever gets hired.

So not only has the Government interfered they have delegated the sole power for hiring at private Businesses that are Unionized to a third party , the Union.
 

Forum List

Back
Top