Thursday, August 29, 2013

Right-to-work works?

Link here.

Larger report here

While I'm always a bit skeptical of reports on either side of this issue, this one seems reasonable.  Further, its worth collecting the evidence as it comes out on this issue.  (We'll want to keep our eyes open for more studies on right-to-work.)  Recall that Michigan passed right-to-work, where employees could choose NOT to join a union, late last year.

An excerpt:

"It is impossible to totally disentangle right-to-work from every other business friendly policy," Hicks said. "That being said, the best studies in this area acknowledge that right-to-work laws are really the king of business friendly policies."
LaFaive agreed.
"There was and remains a lot of debate over whether or not right-to-work laws are economically beneficial," he said. "We believe our study confirms that right-to-work laws have a measurable and positive impact on the economic well-being of a state and its citizens."

1 comment:

  1. I am not really pro or con when it comes to unions. I myself would prefer not to have a union. I think unions can be counter productive in many cases. If unions were so great everyone would want to join.

    On the other hand replacing a union with something else might be a better idea. What about this lets set up an exchange where all companies can be rated objectively..The guest to the exchange would not be allowed to individually compliment or criticize a company that they worked for thats listed on the exchange. Instead a rating of every company would be composed in a aggregate rating composed of all the current employees of a particular company. In order to participate or take part in the rating of your company you must be currently employed by that company. The exchange would be private not run by the government. Im not suggesting that this is some type of socialist program no not anything like that. Here is how it would work by the way its totally voluntary ok.

    Every company on the exchange would be rated by their own employees. The subjective part of the rating would be stuff like do you like your job are you satisfied with the benefits and so forth a third of the rating would be composed of anyone below senior management in management. Two thirds of the subjective rating would be composed of non management. We might start with the quality of the work environment thats working conditions and so forth. We might be more specific and rate the benefits package on a scale between 1 and 10. Rate the pay scale between 1 and 10. Rate the turnover rate between 1 and 10..For example we might compare the ratings of similar jobs against similar jobs at other companies. Their could be twenty or thirty different categories in all. To be fair to all the participating companies they would be given a place on the website to explain their very high or low ratings and the reasons for the rating.

    In this way before I apply for a job. I would want to have a good idea what the pay benefits and working conditions at a particular company are like before I apply. The pay rate for example at different companies for different jobs would be a general range not exact. The benefits package would be more specific. In this way companies with very low ratings would need to improve in order to attact more applicants. Very few people will want to apply at a company thats at the bottom of the heap. In this way companies with low ratings would be forced to improve their rating..