Tuesday, April 12, 2011

NH Senate panel passes right-to-work to kill unions

We just learned New Hampshire's Senate Commerce Committee passed an anti-worker bill today by a vote of 4 to 1. The bill, which has passed the House, heads to the Senate for a floor vote. Gov. John Lynch has said he'll veto the measure. The only question is whether the anti-worker faction has enough votes to override Lynch's veto.

What isn't open to question is that New Hampshire workers will be poorer if right-to-work to kill unions passes. They'll have to work harder, they'll have fewer health benefits and their workplaces will be more dangerous. 

Steven McCloud tells us what happened in Louisiana after that state decided to go after unions in 1976. It drastically changed his family's work for the worse. He's a third-generation member of the Operating Engineers, Local 406 in Lake Charles. McCloud tells us:
The folks who ran equipment in the 1950s through the 1970s could expect to work hard and return home dirty.
However, they could generally count on taking a break at the end of the week. Working overtime or weekends meant extra money on the paycheck. If an operator wanted to save up for a purchase or vacation, he could choose to work overtime when extra hours were available. Overtime was not needed to pay your mortgage.
So most weekends you would expect to find my grandfather’s family either fishing in the Gulf of Mexico or water-skiing off their houseboat on the river. The union ensured a decent workplace, a fair salary, and a safe pension. When my grandfather passed away, the house had long since been paid for and my grandmother had adequate savings to live comfortably. 
Then along came right-to-work to kill unions. Writes McCloud,
Make no mistake, the legislation does exactly what it was designed to do: undermine unionism and solidarity.
In the early 1980s about 33 percent of the Louisiana private construction industry workforce was unionized. By 2010, that had dropped to 2.8 percent....In the years following passage of the law, my father’s income dropped from around $18 an hour to around $12...
My father, in an effort to counteract his lowered purchasing power, was forced to accept a greater and greater number of hours and fewer days off. We were still able to live well during the 1980s and 1990s, but unlike my grandparents, my father worked 50-60 hours a week and my mother contributed another full-time income.
McCloud's brother now works with his father as an operating engineer.
My father and brother typically work 45-50 hours a week, with stretches of 84 hours a week that might last one to three months. Even though working all the time is a horrible way to go through life, those getting 70+ hours a week are often considered the lucky ones. With a substantial percentage of folks either unemployed for long periods or working part-time minimum wage jobs, the employers have set up a system where the worker who does nothing but eat, sleep, and work is envied.
Sounds delightful, doesn't it?