Special Recent Posts
Union Bosses 'Are Not Forced by Federal Law to Be Exclusive Bargaining Representatives; They Seek This Power of Their Own Volition'
March 11th, 2014
Ever since then-Gov. Mitch Daniels signed a bill making Indiana America's 23rd Right to Work state a[...]
National Institute for Labor Relations Research
NILRR’s primary function is to act as a research facility for the general public, scholars and students. It provides the supplementary analysis and research necessary to expose the inequities of compulsory unionism.
It publishes research papers designed to stimulate research and discussion with easy-to-read summaries of current events. NILRR also conducts nonpartisan analysis and study for the benefit of the general public.
It will render aid gratuitously to individuals suffering from government over-regulation of labor relations and will provide educational assistance to those individuals who have proved themselves worthy thereof.
Recently Released Fact Sheet
Border-County Data Strengthen Case That Right to Work Law Would Boost Missouri’s Private-Sector Job Growth
By Stan Greer
This winter, grass-roots proponents of making Missouri America’s 25th Right to Work state are facing off against union officials and other supporters of the current policies that empower Organized Labor to get employees fired for refusal to bankroll a union they don’t want, and never asked for.
The battle is fundamentally over a matter of principle. Should private organizations — labor unions specifically – have the legal power, either explicit or tacit, to tax people who don’t wish to join them? Most Missouri citizens say “no,” while union bosses and their allies say “yes.” But economic considerations are also playing an important role in the debate.
Pro-Right to Work Missourians can point to a wide array of data reported by federal agencies such as the U.S. Department of Labor and the U.S. Commerce Department showing that long-term economic growth is substantially faster in the six Right to Work states neighboring Missouri than it is in the “Show Me” State and its non-Right to Work neighbors. (On its northern, western and southern sides, Missouri is surrounded by Right to Work Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Tennessee, while forced-unionism Illinois and Kentucky lie to the “Show Me” State’s east and southeast.)
From 2002-2012, Missouri Had a Statewide Private-Sector Employment-Growth Deficit of 4.6 Percentage Points, Relative to Its Right to Work Neighbors
For example, from 2002 to 2012, private-sector payroll employment in Missouri’s neighboring Right to Work states increased by 3.0%, compared to a decline of 1.5% for Missouri, Illinois and Kentucky combined, and a 1.6% decline for Missouri alone.
Of course, although portions of Right to Work Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Tennessee are located very near to various portions of Missouri, these six states in their entirety differ substantially from the “Show Me” State in multiple ways that aren’t tied to public policy.
To get a clearer picture of whether the slower employment, compensation and other income growth experienced by Missouri over the years relative to its Right to Work neighbors stems from policy differences, it makes sense to look only at its border counties, rather than the entire states.
Forty-six Missouri counties are adjacent to counties located in other states.