LANSING, Mich.— Michigan enacted a ban on mandatory union membership on Tuesday, dealing a stunning blow to organized labor in the state that is home to U.S. automakers and the symbol of industrial labor in the United States.
As more than 12,000 unionized workers and supporters protested at the Capitol in Lansing, the Republican-led state House of Representatives gave final approval to a pair of "right-to-work" bills covering public- and private-sector unions.
Republican Governor Rick Snyder signed the bills into law as soon as they reached his desk, completing in a few days a campaign to make Michigan the 24th U.S. state to prohibit unions from requiring employees to join and contribute dues.
"I view this as an opportunity to stand up for Michigan's workers, to be pro-worker," Snyder told a news conference after he signed the bills.
The laws will take effect 90 days after the end of the legislative session, which means they will probably come into force sometime in April. Existing union contracts will not be changed until they expire, according to a provision of the laws.
In a rapid turn of events, Michigan moved from being a bastion of union influence to joining states, mostly in the South, that have weakened local protections for unions.
The Teamsters union national president, James Hoffa, whose father, Jimmy Hoffa, was one of the nation's most famous labor leaders until he disappeared in 1975 in Michigan, denounced Republican leaders in a speech to the protesters.
"Let me tell the governor and all those elected officials who vote for this shameful, divisive bill - there will be repercussions," Hoffa said, adding the Republicans could be defeated in the next election.
Unions have accused Snyder of caving in to wealthy Republican business owners and political donors such as the Koch brothers, owners of an energy and trading conglomerate, and Richard DeVos, the co-founder of Michigan-based Amway.
Snyder, a former computer company executive who had said "right-to-work" legislation was too divisive for Michigan, changed course last week and announced his support for it.
While labor leaders decried the legislation, Republican Representative Lisa Lyons said during the debate in the House that such laws were not an attack on unions.
"This is the day Michigan freed its workers," she said.
Opponents argue that the measures undermine a basic union tenet of bargaining collectively with employers for better wages, benefits and working conditions. They also allow workers to opt out of a union, potentially reducing membership.
By weakening unions, Republicans also could hurt the Democratic Party, which traditionally receives a significant portion of its funding and grass-roots support from unions.
Supporters of right-to-work measures say some unions have become too rigid and workers should be given a choice of whether to join. They also say a more flexible labor market encourages business investment, citing "right-to-work" states where some foreign automakers have put plants rather than in Michigan.
CRIES OF 'SHAME'
The measures were approved to cries of "shame" from protesters inside the Capitol building, which was closed to visitors when it reached capacity of 2,200, Michigan State Police Inspector Gene Adamczyk said.
An estimated 10,000 more people demonstrated outside in cold and snowy conditions, including members of the United Auto Workers union, and teachers, who shut down several schools in the state to attend the rally.
A few protesters were ejected from the Capitol after they chanted slogans from the gallery during the debate. Protesters tore down two tents set up for supporters of "right-to-work" on the grounds of the Capitol. Adamczyk said six people were arrested after scuffling with officers.
A mixture of pepper spray and tear gas was used on one person, Adamczyk said, although Reuters journalists also saw protesters sprayed with a substance at a government building near the Capitol.
The protests recalled big rallies in Wisconsin nearly two years ago when Republicans voted to curb public-sector unions. Wisconsin never tried to pass "right-to-work" bills. But Indiana earlier this year became the first state in the industrial Midwest to approve "right-to-work" legislation and several other states are watching the Michigan action closely.
LEGAL CHALLENGES LOOM
Republicans in Michigan were also emboldened by the defeat in the November election of a ballot initiative backed by unions that would have enshrined the right to collective bargaining in the state constitution.
Michigan is home of the heavily unionized U.S. auto industry, with some 700 manufacturing plants in the state. The state has the fifth highest percentage of workers who are union members, at 17.5 percent
The Detroit area is headquarters for General Motors Co , Ford Motor Co and Chrysler, which is majority-owned by Fiat SpA.
The UAW was founded in Michigan after a 1932 protest at a Ford plant in Dearborn left five people dead, increasing public sympathy for industrial workers during the Great Depression and leading to national legislation protecting unions.
Major automakers, which secured concessions from the UAW after nearly going bankrupt during the recession of 2008-09, were careful not to take sides publicly in the fight.
All of the so-called Big Three domestic automakers said they were "neutral" on "right-to-work," even though the Michigan Chamber of Commerce strongly supports it.
"At Ford, we are focused on working with all our partners, including the UAW," the company said in a statement on Tuesday.
Democrats and unions have vowed to challenge the new laws in the courts, to try to overturn them in a ballot initiative and possibly oust through recall elections some Republicans who voted for the measures.
Democratic Representative Douglas Geiss said "right-to-work" laws would lead to a resumption of the battles surrounding the creation of unions decades ago.
"There will be fights on the shop floor if many workers announce they will not pay union dues," Geiss said.
Posted by Sean Sullivan on December 10, 2012 at 10:48 am
The latest front in the battle between Republicans and organized labor is Michigan, where activists in Lansing recently began protests against a measure that would make the state the 24th in the nation to adopt a right-to-work law. The protests are expected to grow in size later this week, as the measure approaches final passage. Below is what you need to know about what is going on in Michigan, and why it matters. (Also check out our colleague Philip Rucker’s excellent piece from the weekend on the battle.)
So, what is all the fuss about?
Last week, the GOP-controlled state Senate and House each passed right-to-work measures over the opposition of Democrats in both chambers, enraging union activists and leaders, and sparking heated protests in the state Capitol. Gov. Rick Snyder (R) has said he will sign a right-to-work measure if it comes to his desk. Snyder’s stance marks an about face; he had previously said that right-to-work was not on his agenda. What does ‘right-to-work’ mean? The term refers to a law that would prohibit requiring workers to pay union dues as a condition of employment. Republicans favor the law because they say it will attract businesses and provide workers with more choice. Union leaders and Democrats see it as a move to curb the power of labor and reduce its influence. Currently, 23 other states have signed such measures into law (here is a handy map of which states have right-to-work laws on the books). One more important thing to note: Police and firefighters could be exempt from the new law.
So, what’s next?
Each chamber of the state legislature has to pass the other one’s bill, then Snyder would have to sign off, something that could happen as soon as Tuesday. Snyder is meeting with Democrats on Monday, but the bottom line is that the right-to-work measure is expected to pass. The protests are also expected to get more intense in Lansing as final votes grow near. Police have maintained a steady presence in and around the Capitol building.
What does President Obama think?
Obama is visiting Michigan on Monday afternoon to pitch his plan for averting the “fiscal cliff,” and it will be interesting to see what, if anything, he says about right-to-work while he is there. A White House spokesman said last week that Obama “has long opposed so-called ‘right to work’ laws and he continues to oppose them now.” Labor was a key Obama ally during the election, which adds yet another political element to the whole situation. One more thing: Snyder is slated to meet Obama on the tarmac when he arrives. (What a photo-op that will be!) What could this mean for Snyder and Michigan Republicans? And what about organized labor? If the measure passes and is signed into law as expected, it looks like it would be difficult to overturn. In Ohio last year, Democratic activists successfully overturned a measure to curb collective bargaining, but in Michigan, spending bills can’t be overturned via referendum. Since an appropriation was tacked on, the Michigan right-to-work measure would fall under that umbrella. Activists have already said they will explore the possibilities of trying to recall Republican legislators and Snyder (though, the governor faces reelection in two years, and Democrats might well keep their focus on defeating him then) if the measure passes. In Wisconsin, Democrats waged a wide-scale recall effort Republicans and Gov. Scott Walker (R) after he signed a 2011 measure to curb collective bargaining. Democrats gained ground in the state legislature, but did not dislodge Walker from power last year. For labor, if the right-to-work law is signed, it would mean another setback and a new fight for unions. And there is an added symbolic element , as Michigan is the birthplace of the United Autoworkers union.
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is the end product of a movement that started many years ago in the American South - You Know, the people so fuching stupid that they would go to war and be slaughtered just so a rich Albino man could keep his Slaves so that he wouldn't have to pay them to do the work that his slaves were doing - In other words, so these asshole wouldn't have jobs.
A hundred years later the descendents of the smart rich Albinos convinced the descendents of the stupid working class Albinos that unions were bad because unions wanted to tell them what to do.
So the stupid working class Albinos elected people who put in place right-to-work laws that said that workers didn't have to join unions or pay union dues. Which in effect strips unions of a cash stream and new membership.
The stupid working class Albinos just love this because it allows the employer to give them the same money, or even more, plus they save on union dues.
Ah, but that's why stupid people always get fuched, hell, they're stupid!
One of the biggest expenses that a unionized employer has is in NON payroll expenses such as health care, annuity accounts for workers, AND PENSIONS!!!!!
If you don't join the union and pay your dues you don't get those. At the same time, if the union membership is weakened, they can't demand those things.
So for every asshole who works under right-to-work rules, the Rich Albino employers are saving SEVERAL THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS EVERY YEAR!!! That's why they went to so much trouble to convince the idiot southern Albino workers to do it.
He,he,he:
Damn, those fuching Crackers and Rednecks sure are stupid.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Masonic Rebel: This should actually be called the right to pay you less law
Technically, it's the right to fire you without giving a valid reason or notice. It opens the door even wider for albinos practising racism with no accountability and little chance of seeking legal discrimination suit against the company or company officers/policies.
Posts: 4693 | From: Saturn | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike you are right the problem is not the rich slave owner, the wall street billionaire/business billionaire and the President of the USA.The problem is the stupid USA white masses who dont know how to think and are easy manipulated by the elite media.The dumb white masses went to war to protect the interest of rich slave owner, wall street billionaire and Texas oilman president.Now they are voting against the Union so the billionaire shareholder will get richer and the worker will get poorer with minimum wages.The five wall mart family members worth $100 billion can continue paying their employee $9 hr working part time.The European masses will never vote for that suicidal law.
I think the USA is being subtely reform to globalise its worforce.The middle class wages are being lowered, benefit reduced and governement entitlement secretly cut in order for the USA to compete with the rise of China as the second superpower.The elite media deceived the white middle class making them believed every body can become rich by honest way thats why most of them are not focus on unionizing.
I was watching Bloomberg news yesterday the defense department is going to pay $125 million a piece for a Lookheed Martin F35 jet fighter that will become obsolete soon.The F18 The best fighter in the US navy and one of the best in the world only cost $60 million a piece.The best Russian jet fighter The Sukhoi37 probably cost $40 million.I remember the B2 bomber cost $1 billion a piece.The Russian and Chinese are focus on becoming rich not world war so the B2 is a white elephant.
To survive one smart person cant depend on the dumb voting white masses. That person most find some capital and become an international investor.
quote:Originally posted by mena7: I think the USA is being subtely reform to globalise its worforce.The middle class wages are being lowered, benefit reduced and governement entitlement secretly cut in order for the USA to compete with the rise of China as the second superpower.The elite media deceived the white middle class making them believed every body can become rich by honest way thats why most of them are not focus on unionizing.
Damn mena7, I thought that you were a young person, how did you figure that out?
Hell, even craggy veterans of the labor movement haven't figured that out - VERY IMPRESSIVE!
But yes, you are correct, the purpose of "Globalization" is to eventually have all workers world-wide have a common pay-scale. With that in place, workers everywhere can produce goods at the same price, and those goods can then be sold everywhere at the same price.
Unions become obsolete, and so do countries, Global Conglomerates and their CEOs become the defacto rulers.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic