American life is dense with ridiculous euphemisms.
Rescue workers killed in drone attacks become “collateral damage” (http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/02/04/obama-terror-drones-cia-tactics-in-pakistan-include-targeting-rescuers-and-funerals/).
Thrice-married serial adulterers pose as defenders of the “traditional values.” (Newt. Newt. Newt. Who do you think you’re fooling?)
And corporations? They are people, my friend. Just like you and me. Maybe in the next election they’ll even get to vote.
But the most ridiculous euphemism of them all may be the so-called “right to work.”
“Right to work” is a slogan associated with anti-union legislation.
Such laws pretend to offer opportunities to workers, but in fact limit their protection from predatory employers.
At issue is the question of whether a union and an employer can agree to charge a fee to those workers who don’t belong to the union but benefit from the results of collective bargaining. That’s banned in “right-to-work” states, making unions weaker, less able to fight for their workers.
As a result, wages in “right to work” states are lower than in other states, the proportion of workers insured by their employer is lower, and employer-sponsored pensions are lower.
The Economic Policy Institute describes this as “the compensation penalty of ‘right-to-work’ laws” (http://www.epi.org/page/-/old/briefingpapers/BriefingPaper299.pdf).
Poverty levels tend to be higher in “right-to-work” states, too. South Carolina, for instance, has been boasted of being a “right-to-work” state for more than fifty years, but has seen the poverty rate creep ever skyward (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-11/new-south-battles-old-poverty-as-right-to-work-promises-fade.html).
Workplace injuries and deaths also run higher in areas of “right-to-work” states with low union density, because unions can actively promote workplace safety through safety training and accident prevention programs (See a careful study of the issue here: http://irlee.umich.edu/Publications/Docs/ightToWorkLawsAndFatalitiesInConstruction.pdf).
In short, if you want more poverty, less job security, more workplace injuries, and less health insurance, push for a “right-to-work” law.
Who would be in favor of legislation so obviously harmful to workers?
Those people who happen to be corporations, naturally.
Irresponsible business groups fund anti-union efforts and pretend that they’re doing workers a favor while they’re at it.
There’s a renewed war against labor in this country.
We’ve seen it here in Ohio; we’ve seen it in Wisconsin; we see it next door in Indiana, which just passed a “right-to-work” law (Or, as the AFL-CIO likes to call it, a “right-to-work-for-less” law.). “Right-to-work” proposals have bounced up in Minnesota and Michigan recently.
But don’t be fooled by euphemisms.
The war against labor is a war waged against all of us.
Every member of a community has an interest in the health, safety and prosperity of its workers–even those members of the community who happen to be corporations.
Respond to James at
