Editor,
You gloated over the dismissal of the USWA challenge to the “Right to Work” law. Though unjust, it was not unexpected. What does “Right to Work” really mean? On face value of the words it means that a person has a some right to a job. Only the most naïve would believe that. Does the law mean that a worker has the right to a job with just compensation, benefits and a safe working environment? Does it mean protection against lay-offs or termination? Actually, the real purpose of “Right to Work”, which is to destroy labor unions, will really accomplish the exact opposite. Without unions, to negotiate wages and benefits, workers’ compensation will stagnate and shrink. Since the 1960s labor unions have steadily lost membership and real wages and benefits have steadily gone down. IOHSA which is already a joke due to restrictions put on it by the Republican legislature will become much less effective. With no union to regulate lay-offs and plead unjust terminations, workers “Right to Work” will be curtailed under this law, not strengthened.
We have the “Greatest Economy in the World”, but the average American worker is the 17th best compensated (real wages and benefits) in the “civilized” world, and we are dead last in paid time off. The average American worker works twenty hours longer per year than the average Japanese worker.
Who benefits from “Right to Work”? The corporations and their paid lackeys in the State Legislatures.
Frank H. Werker
Carmel