How is it that Michigan, of all states, is set to become the latest state to have a right-to-work law? Economic distress is one factor, but personalities and over-reach are factors as well.
Long-term decline leads to a one-state recession
One factor in Michigan’s move to right-to-work is the state’s dismal economic performance. In the 1970s and 1980s, many people fled the state for economic opportunity elsewhere, notably in the sunbelt, where right-to-work is the rule. One running joke was “will the last person leaving Michigan please turn off the lights?”
People kept leaving the state; in 2007, Stateline.org noted that Michigan has lost jobs for six-years running, and was experiencing a “one-state recession.” In 2008, data from United Van Lines showed that Michigan was the number one state for outbound traffic. No wonder; the state ranked 37th in per-capita income. In other words, the old way of doing business wasn’t working anymore.
Much of the decline is related to the auto industry, and the state’s dominance in the world auto market was temporary for at least one reason: The United States bombed the world’s manufacturing base during World War II, and eventually the world would, and did rebuild. But some of the damage was self-inflicted. The over-reach of the UAW, combined with the acquiescence of the “Big 3,” contributed to a decline of the state’s leading industry vis-a-vis companies from Germany and Japan. The power of unions as an engine of prosperity, in other words, came under question.
The Republican Party stays in the game
Another factor setting the stage for right-to-work is that the policy has had a natural home in a major political party. Despite the state’s reputation as a blue state, Republicans have long been competitive, at least in state politics. During the 1990s, John Engler served three terms as governor (1991-2002). During his early years Engler enacted some reforms that kept the idea of competitive markets in play. (In later years he succumbed to some of the temptations of central planners.)
In 2010, Rick Snyder, a businessman, ran as “one tough nerd” in the Republican primary for governor, actively courting Democratic and independent voters, and eschewing red-meat rhetoric. The technique succeeded, both in the primary and in the general election.
Some though certainly not all Republican lawmakers pushed for right-to-work in the new session, but Snyder gave the word that he wasn’t interested in making waves, or at least those waves.
Ballot proposals pushed by unions in 2012 alienated key Republicans
In the 2012 general election, union interests placed two constitutional amendments on the ballot. Proposition 2 would ban right-to-work in the state, and change a number of laws on the books. It promised such chaos, simply on an administrative level, that the pro-union Detroit Free Press encouraged people to vote no. They did, by a final result of 58 to 42 percent.
But the union overreach ticked off Gov. Snyder, as well as some key Republican legislative leaders who were not keen on enacting right-to-work.
While Prop 2 failed, another union-backed measure succeeded. Prop 1 repealed a state law governing emergency managers, officials sent by the state to oversee financially troubled local governments. Several local governments, in particular the City of Detroit and the Detroit Public Schools, have been poorly run and in need of oversight. Not surprisingly, they objected to the emergency manager law.
The intransigence of local governments, based in large measure on public unions, did not endear the union cause to Gov. Snyder, who finally gave word that he would sign a right-to-work bill.
Indiana provides the rationale
It’s worth noting that there are some similarities between Gov. Snyder and Mitch Daniels, the former governor of Indiana. The men are both known as nerds (in the case of Daniel’s, a budget geek), and both opposed right-to-work. But in the last year as governor, Daniels consented, and Indiana became the first state in over a decade to enact a right-to-work law. Snyder has since cited economic developments in Indiana, and his fraternal philosophical twin.
The Affordable Care Act provides the legislative model
The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) provided Republicans a template for action: If you see a key policy area that is dear to you, and could have long-term political benefits, enact it, regardless of the short-term political consequences.
The public image of unions has suffered, especially in recent years
In Michigan, forced unionism has been a part of the landscape, but its image has also been tarnished by the defects of union-made autos. In my youth, the joke was that you didn’t want to buy a UAW car built on a Friday (the workers were so eager for the weekend that they were careless) or on a Monday (they were hung over). Unionism also suffered a PR blow with the “jobs bank” of a few years ago, in which union members were paid in excess of 90 percent of their salary not to work, but to do community service projects. Even this week, the extreme nature of unionism can be seen in the case of stoned and drunken workers being returned to the job, thanks to a union contract.
The union movement has also overreached in its organizing work. In recent years, it attempted to force self-employed daycare owners into unions, as well as people who served as personal care attendants for their children. Both attempts have tarnished the narrative of unions as necessary counterweights to corporate power.
Right-to-work for Minnesota? Not yet
Will right-to-work come to Minnesota? Maybe. But Michigan and Minnesota have some significant differences that make right-to-work in Minnesota less likely.
First, Michigan’s union sector is much more dominated by the private sector than Minnesota’s, and thus more prone to the discipline of the market.
Second, the economic case for right-to-work has been more compelling in Michigan than in Minnesota. It’s likely that Michigan Republicans would not have been as open to right-to-work had the state been an economic basket case–a description that cannot be applied to Minnesota.