Right to Work = Poverty and Welfare

[hazlnut]

Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....

 

[Avorysuds]

List of U.S. states by African-American population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of U.S. states by African-American population

1 Mississippi 1,074,200 37.3
2 Louisiana 1,452,396 31.98
3 Georgia 2,950,435 30.02
4 Maryland 1,700,298 29.44
5 South Carolina 1,290,684 28.48
6 Alabama 1,251,311 26.38
7 North Carolina 2,048,628 21.60
8 Delaware 191,814 20.95
9 Virginia 1,551,399 19.91
10 Tennessee 1,055,689 16.78


Great, I guess this makes you a racist because the majority of the states have the highest black population...

 

[thereisnospoon]

Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....

NIce try..Hey dick nose, these states had poverty issues long before right to work laws were even thought of.
Christ, you commie fuck union flag wavers will stop at nothing.
So what si your goal? To get union membership up to 8% of all workers? Good luck with that.
Unions are probably the single most prevalent issue regarding free trade agreements and how those agreements chased jobs out of the US.

 

[The Professor]

While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):

7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi

This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48

Source: Poverty Rates By State:

List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.

Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.

The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.

 

[Bfgrn]

Human nature has not suddenly changed. The need for unions will never expire...

'Right to Work' for Less

Extremist groups, right-wing politicians and their corporate backers want to weaken the power of workers and their unions through so-called "right to work" laws. Their efforts are a partisan political ploy that undermines the basic rights of workers. By making unions weaker, these laws lower wages and living standards for all workers in the state. By many measures, the quality of life is worse in states with "right to work" laws. Wages are lower, poverty and lack of insurance are higher, education is weaker—even infant mortality and the likelihood of being killed on the job are higher.

States with "Right to Work Laws Have:

Lower Wages and Incomes

• The average worker in states with "right to work" laws makes $1,540 a year less when all other factors are removed than workers in other states.1

• Median household income in states with these laws is $6,437 less than in other states ($46,402 vs. $52,839).2

• In states with "right to work" laws, 26.7 percent of jobs are in low-wage occupations, compared with 19.5 percent of jobs in other states.3

Less Job-Based Health Insurance Coverage

• People in states with "right to work" laws are more likely to be uninsured (16.8 percent, compared with 13.1 percent overall; among children, it’s 10.8 percent vs. 7.5 percent).4

• They’re less likely to have job-based health insurance than people in other states (56.2 percent, compared with 60.1 percent).5

• Only 50.7 percent of employers in states with these laws offer insurance coverage to their employees, compared with 55.2 percent in other states. That difference is even more significant among small employers (with fewer than 50 workers)—only 34.4 percent of them offer workers health insurance, compared with 41.7 percent of small employers in other states.6

Higher Poverty and Infant Mortality Rates

• Poverty rates are higher in states with "right to work" laws (15.3 percent overall and 21.5 percent for children), compared with poverty rates of 13.1 percent overall and 18.1 percent for children in states without these laws.7

• The infant mortality rate is 15 percent higher in states with these laws.8

Less Investment in Education

• States with "right to work" laws spend $3,392 less per pupil on elementary and secondary education than other states, and students are less likely to be performing at their appropriate grade level in math and reading.9

Higher Rates of Death on the Job

• The rate of workplace deaths is 36 percent higher in states with these laws, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.10

1 Economic Policy Institute.
2 U.S. Census Bureau, Table H-8. Median Household Income by State.
3 CFED, Asset and Opportunity Scorecard.
4 Kaiser Family Foundation.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 Census Bureau, POV46: Poverty Status by State: 2010, related children under 18; Table 19. Percent of Persons in Poverty, by State: 2008, 2009 and 2010.
8 Kaiser Family Foundation.
9 National Education Association, Rankings & Estimates–Rankings of the States 2011 and Estimates of School Statistics 2012, December 2011; CFED, Asset & Opportunity Scorecard.
10 AFL-CIO, Death on the Job: The Toll of Neglect, April 2012.

"With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed"
Clarence Darrow

 

[Old Rocks]

While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):

7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi

This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48

Source: Poverty Rates By State:

List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.

Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.

The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.

Interesting numbers. Right to Work states. Only 9 are above the middle, 25 rank. Union states, 15 are above the 25 line. And 7 of the top ten are union. But only 3 Right to Work states are in the top ten.

Steel industry. Strange you should choose the steel industry for an example of 'union caused' job decline. You see, I am a millwright in a steel mill. And it is not unions that caused the job declines, but automation. In fact, working as a millwright in sawmills, construction, and steel mills, I have watched fewer and fewer people produce more and more as we move increasingly into an automated world. At the same time, the people remaining have not seen their wages go up to as they have produced more and more. The increased profit has all gone to the top.

At some point, the people that are left, the millwrights, electricians, and automation people are going to realize the fact that the managers do not have a clue as to how to keep the production going, and we will see a reversal, with much stronger unions than at present.

 

[Seawytch]

 

[Avorysuds]

Didn't France have riots in the streets when they tried make it so a buiness owner could fire useless employee's?

Mass welfare, never ends well, thanks for pointing that out man.

 

[g5000]

While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):

7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi

This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48

Source: Poverty Rates By State:

List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.

Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.

The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.

Excellent work, Professor.

This is a great job of dismantling the Single Cause Fallacy in the OP.

.

 

[hazlnut]

Didn't France have riots in the streets when they tried make it so a buiness owner could fire useless employee's?

Mass welfare, never ends well, thanks for pointing that out man.

In other words, no, france didn't do that.

 

[The Professor]

While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):

7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi

This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48

Source: Poverty Rates By State:

List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.

Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.

The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.

Interesting numbers. Right to Work states. Only 9 are above the middle, 25 rank. Union states, 15 are above the 25 line. And 7 of the top ten are union. But only 3 Right to Work states are in the top ten.

Steel industry. Strange you should choose the steel industry for an example of 'union caused' job decline. You see, I am a millwright in a steel mill. And it is not unions that caused the job declines, but automation. In fact, working as a millwright in sawmills, construction, and steel mills, I have watched fewer and fewer people produce more and more as we move increasingly into an automated world. At the same time, the people remaining have not seen their wages go up to as they have produced more and more. The increased profit has all gone to the top.

At some point, the people that are left, the millwrights, electricians, and automation people are going to realize the fact that the managers do not have a clue as to how to keep the production going, and we will see a reversal, with much stronger unions than at present.

I am fully aware of the effects of automation on the steel industry, in fact I've studied it for decades. However, I am also aware that the extravagant demands of unions are often the REASON why employers seek to automate. It is an undeniable fact that automation is expensive, and the only employers who would consider going this route are those who see it as more cost-effective than traditional labor. It is not just the unions' demand of unreasonable wages, but also unreasonable union-demanded work rules which are designed to maximize the number of employees which cause employers to reduce the number of employees any way possible.

Sometimes unions are their own worst enemy and they don't even know it.

I strongly disagree with you that employees know more about a business than those who manage it. Employees are usually unaware of the economic status of the company with respect to competition and they are generally ignorant of the actual cost of running the business. They know how to do their own particular job, but many of them would fail if they tried to run their own business. I would suggest if they knew how to run their own business, they could make more money working for themselves than working for some uncaring ignorant boss. The fact they are working for someone else says a lot.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....

This is also illustrative of the fact that conservatives/libertarians can’t have it both ways: if they’re opposed to unions then they can’t try to get rid of ‘welfare.’

If they want to get rid of ‘welfare’ then they need to allow workers to organize in a meaningful way.

Of course the actual solution is for employers to pay their workers an honest wage, afford them benefits and safe working conditions, and otherwise treat them with respect, making both unions and welfare unnecessary; this will never come to pass, of course, as employers will always place profit over people.

 

[nesta]

they should really call right to work right to work for less/really low wages cause thats what it is

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

List of U.S. states by African-American population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of U.S. states by African-American population

1 Mississippi 1,074,200 37.3
2 Louisiana 1,452,396 31.98
3 Georgia 2,950,435 30.02
4 Maryland 1,700,298 29.44
5 South Carolina 1,290,684 28.48
6 Alabama 1,251,311 26.38
7 North Carolina 2,048,628 21.60
8 Delaware 191,814 20.95
9 Virginia 1,551,399 19.91
10 Tennessee 1,055,689 16.78


Great, I guess this makes you a racist because the majority of the states have the highest black population...

? How does that make the OP a racist?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....

NIce try..Hey dick nose, these states had poverty issues long before right to work laws were even thought of.

Weren't RTW laws supposed to make their economies better? I thought that was the point of RTW - to make things better for workers and business. Clearly it doesn't do anything to help the former.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):

7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi

This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48

Source: Poverty Rates By State:

List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.

Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.

The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.

In the same geographic area?

Why?

 

[The Professor]

While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):

7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi

This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48

Source: Poverty Rates By State:

List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.

Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.

The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.

Interesting numbers. Right to Work states. Only 9 are above the middle, 25 rank. Union states, 15 are above the 25 line. And 7 of the top ten are union. But only 3 Right to Work states are in the top ten.

Steel industry. Strange you should choose the steel industry for an example of 'union caused' job decline. You see, I am a millwright in a steel mill. And it is not unions that caused the job declines, but automation. In fact, working as a millwright in sawmills, construction, and steel mills, I have watched fewer and fewer people produce more and more as we move increasingly into an automated world. At the same time, the people remaining have not seen their wages go up to as they have produced more and more. The increased profit has all gone to the top.

At some point, the people that are left, the millwrights, electricians, and automation people are going to realize the fact that the managers do not have a clue as to how to keep the production going, and we will see a reversal, with much stronger unions than at present.

A personal note. One time (back in the 1960s as I recall) there was a Bethlehem Steel plant in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, my old home town. This plant was purported to be the largest manufacturer of fastener (nuts and bolts) in the entire world. The plant fell into hard times and management got the union to agree to a reduction in wages; however, this didn't resolve the problem and the company asked for yet another wage decrease. The Union refused, but the company got a buyer, someone who specialized in turning failing company's around. The buyer offered a guaranteed wage for two years (it may have been 3 years) if the union agreed to the wage concession and a change of work rules which would not have affected any worker's salary. Even after the wage concessions, employees would have made twice as much as any other laborers in the county. However, the union took out a full page add in the Lebanon Daily news which effectively told the buyer to kiss their ass. The buyer got the message and told the unions to kiss his ass. The plant closed for good shortly after that and all the hundreds of workers found themselves without a job and nowhere to go.

Some may admire the union for being tough, however, I resent them for being stupid and for being unconcerned about the welfare of the workers. If the union and it's members had the slightest knowledge of the industry they would have realized that the only option to wage cuts was total unemployment.

What really pissed me off is that the unions said the company was misrepresenting their financial position, but they had no proof of this. I made two suggestions: (1) the union demand that the company make all its financial records available to the union-appointed accountant; and (2) any subsequent increase in profits would be shared with union workers in an agreed upon percentage. The unions told me to go to hell. They were obsessed with the second request for a pay cut – a temporary pay cut – to the exclusion of everything else, and their blinded greed ruined the lives of thousands of workers and their families.

The union and its bargaining unit thought they were smart, but they were all completely ignorant, and their ignorance cost them dearly.

 

[The Professor]

While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):

7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi

This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48

Source: Poverty Rates By State:

List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.

Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.

The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.

In the same geographic area?

Why?

Because some states have a higher cost of living than other states or a higher tax rate than other states, which generally requires higher wages to attract workers. Even within a state, certain areas have a higher cost of living than others, and wages are usually higher. Thus higher wages are often attributable to higher cost of living or higher taxes rather than unionism.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....

Only for the Dumb Fucks and Morons.......as it should be.
Why would you pay a Dumb Fuck the same as a Smart Productive employee?

 

[The Professor]

Business are avoiding closed shop states. According to Forbes, Texas, which is a Right-to-work state, leads the way when it comes to states that will add the most jobs over the next five years on a percentage basis.

Texas tops the list of the best states for jobs - Business - Forbes.com | NBC News