Belly35;1829842 wrote:Right to work : To put it simply, a right to work law states that employees cannot be compelled to pay union fees and dues, even if they are covered under a union contract. The idea is that even if a union is operating in a given workplace, people shouldn’t be forced to join to keep their jobs, or ordered to join the union if other workers want to organize. Proponents of these laws say they protect the freedom of association, allowing people to opt out of union membership if they’re not interested.
The Right to Work law has very little or no factor in the economic growth of a state. To the Unions this is fear of losing political power and profiteering.
To assume that Right to Work laws has any effect on state economic growth, average state income salary average or employment figure is a myth provide by the Unions and Democrate party bullshit and those Union Nose Ring members who buy into it miss leading propaganda.
Hail Trump! Obviously the term right to work is false advertising. It undermines the power of workers to bargain with corporations that have much greater resources. The one statement you made that was nearer the truth was "the Right to work law was very little or no factor in economic growth of a state." of course supposed economic growth from union busting is sold as a reason to support the insidious legislation. As can be seen it does not correlate with employment. What it does correlate with is a low income, the bottom of the income list is full of right to work states. They are also the states with the least education and shortest life expectancies. Right to work states are the pits.
