Right-to-work will not save Manufacturing Jobs

This post is in response to the woman who responded to my call on WSPD a week ago. She stated that I had it all wrong, the jobs were leaving to the southern right-to-work states not to other countries. Fred and the misinformed WSPD ditto heads take note!

Arkansas town braces as Whirlpool shuts big plant
By Suzi Parker
FORT SMITH, Ark | Mon Oct 31, 2011
Quote from article:
"Whirlpool said the plant's remaining production, mainly side-by-side refrigerators, would be taken over by a plant in Ramos Arizpe, Mexico. But Gosack said consumer demand for those refrigerators was weak and he expected them to be phased out completely before long."
Complete article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/31/us-whirlpool-arkansas-idUSTRE7...

Ohio Won't Lose Whirlpool Jobs
MARION, Ohio
Friday October 28, 2011
Quote from article:
"Every Whirlpool location across the Buckeye state said they will be adding jobs, some of which were lost from other locations in the U.S."
Complete article: http://www.onntv.com/content/stories/2011/10/28/story-whirlpool-job-cuts...

No votes yet

Right to work isn't a pancea for lost manufacturing jobs. It isn't a guarantee that any jobs will come back. What it is though is morallay right. There is no reason that anyone should have to join a group they don't wish to be a part of simply to work.
Paul is correct in saying right to work will not save manufacturing jobs. Here's a quick edit from Wikipedia which is an interesting read.
A February 2009 report by the Economic Policy Institute shows that unionization does not hinder international competitiveness, and may in fact encourage it[23] A March 3, 2008 Wall Street Journal editorial claimed that, while Ohio lost 10,000 jobs in the past decade, Texas created 1.6 million new jobs. The editorial stated, "Ohio's most crippling handicap may be that its politicians – and thus its employers – are still in the grip of such industrial unions as the United Auto Workers. Ohio is a 'closed shop' state, which means workers can be forced to join a union whether they wish to or not. Many companies – especially foreign-owned – say they will not even consider such locations for new sites. States with 'right to work' laws that make union organizing more difficult had twice the job growth of Ohio and other closed shop states from 1995–2005, according to the National Institute for Labor Relations. Texas, for example, is a right to work state and has been adding jobs by the tens of thousands. Nearly 1,000 new plants have been built in Texas since 2005, from the likes of Microsoft, Samsung and Fujitsu. Foreign-owned companies supplied the state with 345,000 jobs."[24] A September 13, 2008 opinion column by Phil Gramm and Mike Solon stated, "Yes, Michigan lost 83,000 auto manufacturing jobs during the past decade and a half, but more than 91,000 new auto manufacturing jobs sprung up in Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and Texas."[25] Unfortunately, the jobs created in Texas are low paying. The state had a per capita income of $24, 318 as of 2009.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

That's morally right Mr Speedy! The Economic Policy Institute... come on Fred I may as well quote the tooth fairy! More of the right wing propaganda machine. The Texas economy is based on oil and ties with Mexican trade that is killing the Midwest of manufacturing. If Ohio was rich in oil yes we too would have the same.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

"There is no reason that anyone should have to join a group they don't wish to be a part of simply to work."

Totally correct. The worker is only answerable to the business owner who employs him, not to some farcical worker collective that doesn't have capital ownership of the business at all.

RTW overturns that terrible violation of property law, which in the USA should be sacrosanct.

One company does not a trend make...

Actually, a study done several years ago by the National Institute for Labor Relations Research compared the economic performances of Texas and Ohio. It looked at the fact that Texas had added 1,615,000 new jobs over the decade studied while Ohio lost 10,400 jobs. It said that the primary cause for the performance gap was the right-to-work (RTW) laws in Texas.

Other lesser factors included the fact that Texas has no state income tax and some (though not all) provisions of NAFTA.

So while we may be successful with Whirlpool, it doesn't mean we aren't losing other jobs to RTW states.

In fact, the NILRR also found this:

Between 1995 and 2005, U.S. Department of Labor data show private-sector job growth in Right to Work states exceeded private-sector job growth in non-Right to Work states as a group by 79% and in Ohio alone by nearly 500%. Over the same period, inflation-adjusted U.S. Commerce Department data show real personal income growth in Right to Work states exceeded overall personal income growth in non-Right to Work states by 39% and exceeded Ohio’s meager increase by 142%. Meanwhile, U.S. Census Bureau statistics show that, from 1994 to 2004, the number of citizens covered by private health insurance grew by 11.5% in Right to Work states, slightly more than double the aggregate growth in non-Right to Work states. In Ohio, over the same period, the ranks of the privately insured actually declined by 0.2%.

Now, you may not like the NILRR, but the figures are from the government (DOL, Commerce Dept. and Census) not from the NILRR - NILRR is just pointing them out.

I would be interested in a newer study to see what impact the recession has had - perhaps not as much as in private-sector employment due to the number of public-sector jobs in Ohio that have NOT been shed (yet).

Perhaps Whirlpool is the beginning of a reversal of the trend - I don't know. But I do know that economic issues are not the only reason to support a RTW law in Ohio

Lets look at the moral issues as well Maggie that are associated with Right to Work laws, which would include forced union dues and the free rider problem. After examining those two issues one would have to conclude if they are honest and open minded that Right to Work laws are a net benefit to a state and should be adopted because the benefits to a state’s people outweigh the costs: Right to Work laws create jobs and spur economic activity in my mind.

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

http://www.manufacturing.net/articles/2011/11/right-to-work-laws-pay-off...

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

RTW create more jobs Fred? Then why are 8 of the 12 highest unemployment rates in RTW states? These include Alabama, Tennessee and South Carolina. Which I argue, the only reason they can attract any businesses at all is because they are able to use Federal tax dollars that they suck out of NY, CA and NJ to offer huge incentives that most northern/ RTW states couldn’t dream about.

http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/volkswagon-receives...

Basically Volkswagen built its $1 billion with almost 60% paid for by the tax payer! Alabama was only offering to build 40% of the plant for them. If Tennessee and Alabama weren’t sucking at the teats of union states they wouldn’t be able to attract any business at all.

Fred, Koch sucker extraordinaire your wish to eliminate the Middleclass will only end in anarchy. Americans will not go back to the 20th century where children worked in factories and the work week was 80 hours a week for a minimal wage in a unsafe work environment. Without the lobbying of unions, working people will have no voice and as we have seen for the last 30 years, so goes their standard of living as the unions have weakened. You and the afternoon Foghorn Leghorn will never convince me or anyone who works for a living (I mean physically) that working for less pay and paying more for our benefits without a secure retirement is good while idiots like G Norquest pimp the political system for his rich anonymous friends.

Listen to the Newt:
Gingrich thinks school children should work as janitors
Quote:
"More controversial, or at least an idea worthy of inflammatory headline writing (ahem), Gingrich called child-labor laws "truly stupid." Gingrich thinks most of the schools in the nation's poorest neighborhoods "ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor, and pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work, they would have cash, they'd have pride in the schools, they'd begin the process of rising."

Continue reading on Examiner.com Gingrich thinks school children should work as janitors - National populist | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/populist-in-national/gingrich-thinks-school-chil...

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

"[Y]our wish to eliminate the Middleclass will only end in anarchy."

No, the major parties as vassals of the wealthy are the ones who wish to eliminate the middle class, first by indebtedness (to which the middle class took like a crack whore after a rock) and next by employment starvation.

This entire thing must end up with a much poorer working class in the USA. There is no way around it. In the moderate term, Americans must compete with the world's workforce, and most of those can make do with about $2/hr over that term. Unfortunately, Socialists, Communists and other wackjobs like yourself believe that larger and more expensive government is the answer. After all, you're part of "the 47%" who probably pays no income taxes, so what do you care who's hit with the bill?

The key issue here (other than your ideological stupidity) is that you cannot succeed in legislating where and when people spend their money. Capitalists are free to accumulate as much wealth as they want, and are free to flee the nation with it all. That's essential liberty and there's no power on Earth that can stop that; after all, even if you did pass a law that said "your account movements are now subject to approval by a government clerk", the capitalists would either flee directly or just never start up business in the newly confiscatory USA.

As a dyed-in-the-wool Socialist, however, you never did understand where all that STUFF out there came from. It was all there when you were born and people just seemed to move it around in your poorly-educated Liberal viewpoint. So you got this stupid idea in your head that all that wealth is somehow in the commons of our society, and not actually privately owned and managed.

In short, I'm telling you to go and fuck yourself.

Your wish for a socialist America is in progress and when you get it, so be it, you will not be exempt....

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

The capitalist system will work if there is regulation that works for everyone. As we have it now the system is broken and next summer will be a repeat of 1968.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

No it won't. The system is broken because both parties are bought and paid for by big business and big unions. If anything is going to take place, it's going to take place at the ballot box starting at the top.

Political Championship Wrestling- putting politics in proper perspective by presenting it as pro wrestling.

Coming in January, a political satire about the sorry state of American Politics- Jesusland vs. Progressiveville.

Correct. We have to abolish the supremacy of the two-party system. Under those parties, for 70 years, the federal government's budget grew about 3 times faster (7.7% yearly on average) than can be accounted for by real wage growth (2.5%/yr avg) combined with population growth (x2.3). They covered it all up with borrowing that only set new records with each decade that passed. Now we've really stepped in it, and so massively increased our already absurd borrowing that we increased the federal debt by 50% in only 3 years. Our debt now exceeds our GDP, which is a clear indication of a failed nation. We've failed. The United States of America is a failure by absolute metrics.

As you identified, our two major parties really are one, the Warfare-Welfare Spending Party, aka the Corporate-Socialist Party. Voting for one over the other does precisely nothing but keep the same system running towards economic catastrophe.

is coming how about Bachman and Paul and Allen West for starters.

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

Third parties, even when they were prevalent, had little affect on the country's politics. The natural state of order is there are two basic sides to every issue.

What is more realistic is that one of the two major parties will be replaced by a new 2nd Party much like when the Whigs disintegrated and ushed in the "Era of Good Feeling" before the Republican party arose to support abolition.

Even in countries that have third parties they generally don't survive unless their is another sociological divide such as along religious or cultural lines. Even then their affect is limited. And these are much more typical in existence of a parliamentary system which we do not have.

MikeyA

AH first you say, "both parties are bought and paid for by big business and big unions," then you say, "change at the ballot box staring at the top." Isn't that contradictory? How will anything change when you have lobbyists like Grover Norquist shelling out secret money to defeat those that the oligarchy dislike? No the money has to be taken out of politics otherwise as I have correctly predicted last year http://www.toledoblade.com/Letters-to-the-Editor/2010/12/15/Majority-sho... violence will continue. You have lost the poor and now the Middleclass are losing hope. If the majority cannot partake in the American dream well, then, no one will.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

The only violence that's being propagated is by the big unions (see Wisconsin recall) and now the OWS...I am the 99...no...50...no...25...er...5%...fringe extremists.

Grover Norquist. Out of state big unions coming into Ohio to shell out big money to protect big labor's political power. Really, there is no difference between the two now, isn't there?

Guest Zero is correct. The problem here, just like in the BCS, is that the Michigans and Ohio States, just like the Republicans and Democrats, have effectively locked out the Toledos and Bowling Greens, average American citizens, out of the system.

Opening up the ballot box and removing the layers of bureaucracy to keep independent third parties off the ballot and not filing suit to keep certain candidates off the ballot (Democrats, I'm looking at you and what you did to Ralph Nader in 04), would be a good start.

Political Championship Wrestling- putting politics in proper perspective by presenting it as pro wrestling.

Coming in January, a political satire about the sorry state of American Politics- Jesusland vs. Progressiveville.

How many times do we have to tell you that the "American Dream" is over? The American middle class is too expensive to maintain, so it's being dropped. This is unstoppable and in fact is well along in the plan to enact said degradation. Those who still cling to the unworkable ideas of pervasive health insurance and jobs and pensions, will just end up losing everything they own, and that likely includes their relationships and sanities.

Eventually when the loss of affordable oil kills off globalism, the middle class can rebuild itself in the nation. But there's no way to legislate stability to exist in the interim. All avenues of action are closed. What's left is adaptation. So you either adapt or suffer. I can see that you are too stubborn to accept the truth, hence you're not going to adapt (i.e. brutally reduce your standard of living), hence you're just opting to suffer. I hope you enjoy it. I know I'm going to enjoy your coming suffering a lot; I get a charge out of hearing the severely indebted whine about their bills and lack of employment and falling housing prices, and all the rest of those examples of the collapse of living beyond your intrinsic means.

The national vast right wing movement to push right-to-work on the North will backfire. The knuckle dragging right wing talking media heads will only push Republican out of Ohio during the next election cycle. Kasich is truly afraid for his own survival after the punishing defeat of issue 2. You will NOT see Kasich promoting right-to-work.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

You like to copy and paste (probably started with paper dolls when you were in high school)

Why dont you look up the stat's on how RTW states are doing vs Closed shop states nation wide...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.