‘Fighting the freeload’: another opinion piece opposes 'right to work' amendment
“Fighting the freeload” is the headline of an opinion piece posted on the Twin Cities Daily Planet. The editorial opposes the GOP-controlled Minnesota Legislature’s proposed “right to work” constitutional amendment.
“Work hard,” the Daily Planet editorial begins. “Benefit from hard work, time and investment, then give it all away to someone who doesn’t invest, work hard or put in the time.
“Welcome to the realities of the proposed ‘right to work’ constitutional amendment …”
MAPE has pointed out many times before that, according to BLS.gov., workers in “right to work” states average $5,333 a year less in income than those in states without this union-killing legislation.
The editorial pulls Census data contrasting Minnesota to neighboring “right to work” states – Iowa, and North and South Dakota. Compared to those three states, Minnesota has a higher medium household income, lower rate of those living in poverty, higher percent of high school graduates and more with bachelor’s degree or higher education, the editorial pointed out.
“There are 23 other states in the U.S. that are presently ‘right to work’ states,” the editorial added. “Recognize any that consistently score higher than Minnesota? There aren’t any.”
GOP majorities in Legislature move slowly
With the memories of union battles in Wisconsin, Ohio and other states still fresh, the GOP majorities in the Minnesota Legislature are moving slowly on whether or not they want to take on the fight with unions over proposed “right to work legislation, according to a Minneapolis Star Tribune article titled, GOP weighs cost of union battle.
More opinion pieces oppose “right to work”
“Wrong” for Minnesota and a “right to freeload,” is how media articles and posts are labeling the Minnesota Legislature's proposed “right to work” constitutional amendment.
Two opinion pieces in the Star Tribune on Feb. 19 oppose “the wrongly-named “right to work” proposed constitutional amendment. The Star Tribune’s editorial (Editorial: 'right to work' is wrong for state) pointed out that “right to work” “is wrong for this state.”
Gov. Dayton pointed out is his State of the State address that Minnesota has a lower unemployment rate than four of the five “right to work” states ranked by a top conservative business group, the Star Tribune editorializes. “Contrary to what its label implies, it would give no one the right to a job,” the editorial said in part. “Rather, it would allow workers in union shops the option of a ‘free lunch’ – the chance to benefit from collective bargaining without paying for it.”
Another opinion piece by University of Minnesota Professor Aaron Sojourner, an economist and faculty in the Center for Human Resources and Labor Studies, was published in Sunday’s Star Tribune (Say no to right-to-work University economist) challenges the claims of those who would like to make Minnesota a "right to work" (RTW) state. Not only is “right to work” wrong Minnesota, Sojourner said, “… States with RTW laws should repeal them and join free-bargaining Minnesota. We enjoy a higher standard of living, stronger economic growth, a better education system and a more promising strategic position for the future.”
In an article and video aptly name, “Right to Freeload,” Minnesota 2020 said it's important to know what could be stripped away by proposed legislation. The website has a video that talks to workers that this proposed constitutional amendment would remove benefits provided by unions, compromise safety, shortcut training programs, and even eliminate voices in contract negotiations.