Labor
union members in
Michigan find
themselves
injected into a
debate about how
to fix
Michigan's
economy and make
our state more
"competitive."
Some voices
suggest that
there are too
many union
members. These
voices say
unions are too
strong, and our
wages and
benefits make
our employers
uncompetitive.
These comments
lead to
suggestions to
cut workers'
benefits and
pass legislation
such as
right-to-work
laws, which
reduce wages and
weaken
collective
bargaining.
Let me ask a few
questions.
First, compete
with whom? The
Chinese
manufacturing
worker who makes
between 39 cents
and 80 cents an
hour and has no
benefits? The
jobs lost to
Chinese
manufacturing
are not due only
to uncompetitive
wages. We simply
cannot expect
our American
workers to work
for 39 cents an
hour.
Don't blame
wages, costs
Jobs lost to
China are caused
by greed and a
lack of American
industrial
policy. Blaming
wages and labor
costs alone is
too simple of an
answer.
Who are the
American
consumers who
fuel more than
60 percent of
our economy?
They are largely
middle-class
workers.
Reducing
workers' ability
to spend in our
economy and
reducing
workers' ability
to be consumers
cannot be an
overall good
thing.
Reducing or
eliminating
pensions and
retiree health
care coverage
tends to make
paupers out of
the retired,
formerly robust
consumers.
There is a line
that we must not
cross in our
economy. If the
middle class is
forced to reduce
its
discretionary
spending below a
level that helps
grow our
national
economy,
consumer
spending then
decreases to a
point that
actually slows
the overall
economic
activity. A
recession would
result.
Why weaker
unions?
Why are certain
Michigan
proponents
calling for
weaker unions?
States without
much union
density,
so-called
right-to-work
states, have
median household
incomes of
$6,000 less than
states like
Michigan,
according to the
Economic Policy
Institute. Less
money for
families, more
profits for
business.
Union-organized
states have more
of their
citizens covered
by health
insurance (16.1
percent compared
with 13.4
percent). Again,
more
out-of-pocket
costs by
individuals,
more savings and
profits for
their employers.
Those calling
for weaker
unions have a
vested interest,
that of putting
more coins into
their own vest.
Would workers
feel safer in a
state without
strong unions?
They shouldn't.
In 2004, the
rate of
workplace
fatalities was
41 percent
higher in
right-to-work
states. In
nonunion coal
mines last year,
a miner was
almost 10 times
more likely to
die if he or she
was not in a
union. Last
year, 42 out of
47 American coal
miner deaths
were in nonunion
mines.
Does union
membership and
high union
density make
workers in a
state like
Michigan the
only ones who
suffer from
cheap
competition? Not
necessarily.
NAFTA hurts
South
The furniture,
manufacturing
and textile
industry in
North Carolina,
a state with
only a few union
members, has
lost well more
than 200,000
jobs since the
passage of the
North American
Free Trade
Agreement. Do
high rates of
unionization
make companies
leave their home
states? Not
necessarily. Two
major Michigan
corporations
have announced
their relocation
outside of
Michigan.
Neither of the
companies,
Pfizer nor
Comerica, were
unionized
companies. Wages
were not an
issue.
Unionization was
not an issue.
Families need
adequate income
to have a high
quality of life.
Trying to reduce
our way to
prosperity by
cutting wages
and benefits and
weakening unions
just doesn't
work. Michigan's
most recent
plant closing is
Pine River
Plastics of St.
Clair, where
more than 400
nonunion workers
made $10.50 per
hour, almost 50
percent below
Michigan's
average wage. No
union,
less-than-average
wages and the
plant still
closed. Instead,
Michigan needs
to grow out of
our problems.
Worker training
and education
and, yes,
high-wage and
high-skill jobs
are what our
state needs.
The New York
Times said in a
March 2007
editorial that
"Labor unions
have a role to
play in helping
to fix today's
economic ills --
most notably,
(the) worsening
income equality,
a problem that's
caused in part
by unions'
decline and the
workers'
resulting lack
of bargaining
power." The
Times has it
right. Those who
want to fix
Michigan only by
seeking to
attract
businesses to a
low-wage state
have it wrong.