A hot-button issue -- whether Michigan should become a "right to work" state -- is back on the main stage in Lansing.
This past week's election pushed that volatile question to the top of some Republican lawmakers’ agendas, writes Kristen M. Daum in the Lansing State Journal. Three of the six statewide proposals voters rejected Tuesday involved workers' collective bargaining rights.
House Republicans appear willing to start a political debate that undoubtedly will incite the fury of Michigan’s labor unions and their allies, while putting Republican Gov. Rick Snyder and Senate leadership smack in the middle of the fight. . . .
Discussions over such a policy could begin as early as the end of this month when the Legislature reconvenes its lame-duck session. . . .
It’s a fight that could be reminiscent of the labor battles waged last year in Wisconsin, where Republican efforts to scale back collective bargaining rights for public employees sparked massive protests and a failed recall against Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican.
Right-to-work laws in 23 states bar mandatory union membership or dues payments as a condition of employment. Backers say this promotes job growth, while critics say it seriously undercuts workers’ rights.
“Nobody wants a war over this stuff,” state Republican Party chair Bob Schostak of Bloomfield Hills tells Daum. “We just want a productive state that’s a place for jobs and growth.”
Snyder has warned fellow Republicans not to touch the politically risky issue. But now some of his allies see an opening, according to the Lansing paper:
Some House Republicans said the unions brought the potential battle on themselves by pushing for Proposal 2, a failed measure on last week’s ballot that would have enshrined collective bargaining rights in the state constitution.
Democrats and union leaders point their fingers back at Republicans. They say Republicans instigated the fight by proposing what they claim were more than 100 anti-labor bills since 2010. . . .
“We’re facing a lot of bad legislation that takes away bargaining rights and takes away the ability to have a voice in the workplace,” says Ray Holman, spokesman for United Auto Workers 6000, the largest state employees’ union. “It’s a little depressing -- that we really worked hard and got a lot of people motivated and felt it was a righteous cause -- to have voters reject it.”
The spokesman for House Speaker Jase Bolger, R-Marshall, says unions opened the door for a legislative right-to-work debate.
“We respected the governor’s request to not push that forward. The unions did not respect that request and pushed forward through Proposal 2,” Ari Adler tells the Lansing reporter. A bill could be introduced as "a starting point," he indicates.
When the Legislature's 2013-14 term starts in January, Republicans will have a 26-12 majority in the Senate and a 59-51 edge in the House.
About 17.5 percent of Michigan's paid workers -- 671,100 people -- were union members in 2011. Another 32,000 were represented by one even though they didn't pay dues, according to federal figures in the State Journal.
A 62-year-old Lansing voter named Edson M. Schaus shares his viewpoint as a comment under Daum's article. An excerpt:
Right-to-work supporters in the Legislature should think carefully about moving forward. I voted against Proposal 2 because I didn't believe a change to Michigan constitution needed. However, I do believe in the ability of labor to enter into effective collective bargaining groups. In order for those groups to have effective bargaining leverage, mandatory membership in the specific bargaining group and government support of those bargaining agreements are required.
Legislators who would remove that tool from labor may find themselves out of work come the next election cycle.
