Conservative think tank touts right-to-work law for Maine

The Maine Heritage Policy Center this week released a report it says shows people are fleeing Maine for "right-to-work" states and concludes that Maine should adopt a right-to-work stance — prohibiting unions from charging workers who don't want to become union members — if it wants to boost its economy.

But others say the conservative think tank's analysis is flawed.

"I would doubt one in 1,000 Americans even knows what right-to-work is, much less moved (for it)," said Gordon Lafer, an associate professor at the Labor Education and Research Center at the University of Oregon. "The Maine study says people are voting with their feet. They're not voting. If you look at the reasons for which people move, none of it is because of state labor laws."

The Heritage Policy Center's short report released Monday talks about Oklahoma's experience since it established a right-to-work constitutional amendment in 2001. Twenty-two states have right-to-work laws; Oklahoma's law is the most recent.

According to the report, Oklahoma's manufacturing industry saw a surge in gross domestic product — the value of goods and services — between 2003 and 2010. The report also says Oklahoma struggled to get people to move into the state before it passed its 2001 right-to-work law. But between 2003 and 2008, it gained more than 40,000 people and $99 million in income.

"After right to work passed, it did a 180 and people were moving into the state," said J. Scott Moody, chief economist for the Heritage Policy Center and author of the report.

The report compared where new Mainers were moving from and where former Mainers moved to. Citing IRS statistics, the Heritage Policy Center says Maine lost more than 15,000 households to right-to-work states between 1995 and 2008.

The report concluded that Oklahoma's right-to-work law has been a boon for that state. It said Maine would gain workers and see an improvement in the economy if it became a right-to-work state, too. 

"This evidence should help convince Maine policymakers that RTW is, in fact, good economic policy. In particular, RTW would help Maine’s manufacturing sector and reduce Maine’s out-migration to RTW states, among other benefits, providing a timely and cost-free boost to the economy," the report said.

However, Moody backed away Tuesday from the report's assertion that the state would gain workers or improve its economy. He said the report was meant to show only that Maine would become more "economically competitive" under right to work, not that it would add people or jobs, or that it would entice businesses to come here.

"Companies that are here or that start up in the future will have the flexibility, the assurance of flexibility, they need to compete in the global marketplace," Moody said.

He believes companies would gain that flexibility with a growing pool of nonunion workers. He said he also believes manufacturing productivity would increase and pay would increase along with it.

Others, however, disagree.

According to experts, right-to-work proposals and responses to those proposals often break down by party lines. Republicans tend to like right-to-work laws because they can lower union membership. Democrats tend not to like them, also because they tend to lower union membership.

In Maine, Democrats on Tuesday called the Maine Heritage Policy Center's report a "sham" and pointed to national studies disputing claims that right to work would create jobs or help the state. One report they pointed to was Moody's own, co-authored in 2010 for the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. In it he shows Oklahoma lost more than 9,000 jobs between 2001, when it became a right-to-work state, and 2008.

"More troubling is that several regional competitors have seen significant in-migration of jobs — some of which were surely former Oklahoma jobs," the report said.

Democrats also point to reports done by the Economic Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit that bills itself as non-partisan, though some conservatives say it has a liberal bias. At least one of those reports was done by Lafer.

At the University of Oregon, Lafer has been studying labor and employment issues for 25 years, with a focus on right to work for the past year and a half. He read the Maine Heritage Policy Center's report Monday and had some misgivings.

He said the report's look at Oklahoma's average economic growth rate was meaningless because it didn't factor in other reasons for that growth, such as a surge in the state's major industries: oil and gas. He said the report assumes people are moving into Oklahoma and out of Maine because of their right-to-work stances, but the report provides no evidence to back that up.

Lafer said the report also assumes manufacturers will move to Maine if the state changes its right-to-work stance, but an industry survey by Area Development magazine shows that isn't likely.

"It's totally nonpolitical, it's a magazine of the site location industry. And they do a survey of employers, it's weighted toward small manufacturers . . . and they ask them, 'What are the factors that affect your location decision?' Last year, right to work ranked 16th," Lafer said. "The things that ranked higher are what I think makes sense when you think about it: How close am I to my suppliers or customers? How close am I to a major highway or rail line or port, or whatever you need? What's the cost of construction? What's the cost of real estate? What's the tax structure of the state?"

Under federal law, workers cannot be forced to join a union as a condition of their employment. In Maine, unions can charge a worker for the services the union provides, such as contract negotiation or dispute resolution, even if that worker doesn't want to be an actual member of the union. In a right-to-work state, unions cannot charge a worker at all if that worker doesn't want to join the union.

Moody said he knew nothing about the federal law.

"I'm not sure what that pertains to," he said.

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



JOANNE MOORE's picture

The wacky right-wing conservatives

would like nothing better than to destroy unions. They are drooling over the prospect of lowering wages for everyone in fact. They have been chipping away at workers rights for years.

It took blood, sweat and tears to form unions. Labor history shows men and women banding together against greedy corporations so that they might have better working conditions like a 40 hour work week, sick leave, overtime and a safe work place. And unions have raised working standards for ALL workers, union or not.

Maine Heritage Policy Center is an enemy of working people. So is the Chamber of Commerce. They are dedicated to the destruction of the middle class. They would take us all back to a time when disasters like the Triangle Shirtwaist fire were commonplace. Do we want that in Maine? I don't think so.


Which rights?

I call this the right to work for nothing law. As if we don't have enough jobs in Maine that don't pay a living wage. The folks who advocate this remind me of the boss who tells you that you have to take a cut in salary because times are tough and the business is on the verge of going under then after cutting your salary and hours takes off for his Caribbean vacation. Oh, and the reason we have lower wages than New Hampshire is that most of that state is within commuting distance to Boston. Aroostook County, however, is not.

Tim McClure's picture

Reality Check

You make the assumption employers don't value their employees. Any boss who doesn't will either go out of business or spend most of his time hiring replacements.


Maine needs more people?????

Maine needs more people????? I think Maine needs more jobs for the people we already have before trying to lure more people here. Wasn't one of the problems that many think too many come here for the welfare????


Who needs legislators?

I suppose that until the people of Maine come to their senses and amend the constitution to rid the state of lawmakers, replacing them with Lance and his gang at MPHC, we will continue to have to go through the wasteful procedure of having MPHC's decisions ratified by the legislature.

It would be so much more efficient if Sir Lancelot simply gave LePage his marching orders and he oversaw their implementation.

Tim McClure's picture

Its about time.

This would have been nice 30 years ago when I walked into the National Meritime Union and was told I had to pay them 900 bucks within 24 hours of finding a job. The first word that came to mind was extortion. In essence I had to pay them to keep a job I had to go find. Being 22 years old, I couldn't afford $900. Every time I drive by a union hall, that's my memory.

As far as I know closed shop unions still exist. According to this article federal law says you cannot be forced to join. But you can be forced to pay dues under the guise of a service fee. Whats the difference? I feel sorry for the state employees who don't want to join the union but are forced to pay dues anyway.

It is way past time to change these arcane laws. Its time Maine joined other states and became a "Right To Work" state.

Tim McClure's picture

Who say everyone should be paid the same?

I have no problem paying folks a different wage. I prefer a system that rewards hard work over someone who is average or a poor performer. I prefer not to be treat everyone the same because we are not all the same.

David  Cote's picture

There you go again, Dan...

Questioning the integrity of a reporter and her work ethic. Questioning whether she's being paid off to be an organization's stooge? Over the line! Of course if Tice's article pointed out misgivings of the Republican party you'd be tripping over yourself to complement how good of an investigative reporter she is. Expressing opinions of content is what we do here, however, what you are implying goes well beyond the boundaries of good taste.


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...