Do union workers need a RAISE?
posted at 3:41 pm on April 18, 2012 by Tina Korbe
Actually, they just might. Indiana Republican Rep. Todd Rokita reintroduced the Rewarding Achievement and Incentivizing Successful Employees Act today. Introduced in the last Congress by Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter and California Republican Tom McClintock, the RAISE Act lifts the “seniority ceiling” on workers’ wages by allowing employers to pay individual workers more — but not less — than the union contract specifies.
Most people know that union contracts establish wage floors, but few realize they also establish wage ceilings. Those wage ceilings are harmful to productivity. Diligent workers receive the same raises as slackers — so what incentive do workers have to be diligent? Employers should at least have the freedom to reward workers for above-average performance when they see fit.
Plus, Heritage Foundation research indicates that the RAISE Act would provide the right kind of stimulus for a slow economy:
Economic research also shows that union members work just as hard to earn raises as nonunion workers when unions permit performance-based pay. Some 8.6 million workers are covered by collective bargaining agreements regulated by the National Labor Relations Act. If Congress passed the RAISE Act to amend the NLRA, many unionized employers would offer performance pay to inspire hard work. The workers at these companies would earn between $2,600 and $4,300 per year more than if Congress left the union wage ceiling in place.
These higher earnings would provide the right type of stimulus to get the economy moving. Workers would earn more money by creating wealth through their own hard work, adding tens of billions of dollars to the economy. Their greater productivity would also improve business earnings. Instead of fighting over how to redistribute wealth, the RAISE Act encourages employers and employees to work together to create more wealth and spark economic renewal.
This is the type of policy that President Obama called for when criticizing the executive bonuses paid by AIG: “We believe in the free market, we believe in capitalism, we believe in people getting rich, but we believe in people getting rich based on performance and what they add in terms of value and the products and services that they create.” The RAISE Act enables enterprising workers to be rewarded for their own hard work.
Finally, what’s for the unions to not like? They do exist for the worker, right? Union bosses wouldn’t be all about their own power, would they? Wage ceilings contribute to the power of union bosses because they enable the bosses to take credit for any pay increases employees receive. Merit-based raises and spot bonuses remind employees that they earn their salaries, that their wages actually come from their job-creating employer and leave employees feeling a little less beholden to the union. Union opposition to an act like RAISE would be the most blatant expression of union leaders’ true priorities yet.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Good for the New company. And ensure that you keep unions out by telling them up front: If you unionize, we’ll shut back down or move to a non-union state. Especially in Illinois where that crap is like a virus spreading amongst the populace there. Those idiots don’t get it unless they are fired for being too stupid to cross a street in a ghost town.
JP1986UM on April 26, 2013 at 4:06 PM
In Utopia, you have to, if the State says that you have to.
That’s the whole point of Utopia.
You’ll have to.
OhEssYouCowboys on April 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM
Well, I guess the unions really showed management who’s boss.
/s
AZfederalist on April 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM
I predict the Twinkie Massacre of 2013. Union thugs beating people, fire bombings, etc.
portlandon on April 26, 2013 at 4:08 PM
I ran this through my super decoder ring and got this:
“We need to eat. I can’t make my mortgage or car payments anymore. Please, please, please, give us a shot. I promise we won’t jack you around anymore for more money, less hours, and more power over a company that we don’t own any part of, you know, the usual union BS.”
BobMbx on April 26, 2013 at 4:08 PM
THAT is what should have happened to GM and Chrysler.
Steve Eggleston on April 26, 2013 at 4:10 PM
Delicious development
i enjoy watching unions implode
DanMan on April 26, 2013 at 4:11 PM
Great news for Hostess. I hope the union thugs don’t try to keep workers away with threats? They are a nasty bunch and don’t give up easy!
L
letget on April 26, 2013 at 4:11 PM
Umm, no.
Jabberwock on April 26, 2013 at 4:15 PM
Good luck with that. The unions think that all this kind of talk is bluffing by evil corporate overlords who are stockpiling away mountains of unneeded cash and could pay everyone a $100,000 salary if they weren’t so evil. The unions always attempt to call the bluff and they always end up losing when businesses close.
Shump on April 26, 2013 at 4:16 PM
Yeah, but ~60% of federal government employees are union. Why is the federal government unionized anyway? My wife works for the State Department (PSC contract), and it is impossible to get anyone fired. It almost never happens, even for non-performance.
Hang in there Hostess!
Patriot Vet on April 26, 2013 at 4:17 PM
Eh ?
Just show a picture of the thugs preventing workers from going to work in the bakery.
That won’t last long.
Jabberwock on April 26, 2013 at 4:17 PM
Unless you’re in a public employee union. Then the union will work with management (the government) to pick the pockets of taxpayers.
Bitter Clinger on April 26, 2013 at 4:18 PM
Oh jeez I just don’t know how the new company will attract any workers, I mean the unemployment rate is so low. /
Or maybe they are waiting for that immigration bill to usher in those unsuspecting immigrants to take lousy jobs? /
redguy on April 26, 2013 at 4:19 PM
st Louis desperately needs the jobs. unionizing would be the kiss of death.
tom daschle concerned on April 26, 2013 at 4:19 PM
Obama gave all the union employees a cushy landing….they won’t want to work now.
redguy on April 26, 2013 at 4:20 PM
While I never was a twinkie fan, hubby used to eatemup.
Bravo for the sans* bit :)
jersey taxpayer on April 26, 2013 at 4:20 PM
I am sure the Obama administration will give the new company grief at every turn….
They might want to wait until 2016 for major investments…..
redguy on April 26, 2013 at 4:21 PM
Very good news but why would they even consider building/hiring in Illinois or CA? Aren’t they just asking for union trouble?
Newly, ‘right to work’ Wisconsin is just up the road.
JetBlast on April 26, 2013 at 4:30 PM
I think the Schiller Park, Ill. plant will be a challenge to keep
freenon-union.Rich H on April 26, 2013 at 4:32 PM
Unions are un-American. Bravo to the new management!
beatcanvas on April 26, 2013 at 4:34 PM
This should help the Food Truck Thread industry.
SparkPlug on April 26, 2013 at 4:40 PM
This.
Bitter Clinger on April 26, 2013 at 4:40 PM
Sadly Erika, the union sees that as a victory. They would prefer to send a message to corporations that if they don’t give in to the greedy union, the greedy union can break the corporation. A few jobs lost means nothing greedy union management.
Hostess would be insane to open or reopen any facility that’s not in a Right-to-Work state.
slickwillie2001 on April 26, 2013 at 4:47 PM
I tried one of the NEW, NON-UNION Twinkies. Naturally, like everything else, they’re of better quality, better tasting, more appealing, cost less and are even more greatly satisfying now that they DO NOT HAVE THE UNION LABEL!!!!!!
TeaPartyNation on April 26, 2013 at 4:57 PM
The unions are destructive. Unions are unnecessary in today’s workforce. Let alone a Twinkie factory.
Kini on April 26, 2013 at 4:57 PM
Quoted from the CBS article gruesomely titled “Have Twinkies Killed the Union Movement?”
Does this mean 14.3 million of all private sector workers?
egmont on April 26, 2013 at 5:07 PM
Darn, and here I am on a perpetual diet having lost 30 lbs. over the last 3 1/2 months…
kirkill on April 26, 2013 at 5:15 PM
They should move to Colorado, then they could make those “Special” Brownies…
kirkill on April 26, 2013 at 5:16 PM
Good luck, Hostess!
FloatingRock on April 26, 2013 at 5:23 PM
Translation: the new company better hire us back. Would be a shame is something happened to your families…
Sockpuppet Politic on April 26, 2013 at 5:25 PM
Barky will send the NLRB as a proxy to disrupt any attempt at starting a successful business, of course.
Philly on April 26, 2013 at 5:29 PM
Let’s face, there’s no way hostess can avoid California. Too much money. I think they can avoid unions if they’re careful.
I don’t know how pervasive bakers unions are here.
I’m not a fan of unions, in a job I had in high school, I was forced to pay dues to the CWA, even though I didn’t want to join.
But,I’m in entertainment, so I’m surrounded by unions, Sag/aftra, teamsters, etc.
Sag is the worse. Of course everyone wants to join because otherwise you can’t work as an actor. I’m constantly Taft Hartley ing actors so I can use them.
Sag then charges these poor actors $2,300 to join plus annual dues. Or you don’t work.
danielreyes on April 26, 2013 at 5:41 PM
They’ll have them re-unionized within a year.
HopeHeFails on April 26, 2013 at 5:56 PM
Exactly.
Count to 10 on April 26, 2013 at 6:02 PM
Just like cars and trucks, right?
slickwillie2001 on April 26, 2013 at 6:03 PM
EXACTLY.
Bob's Kid on April 26, 2013 at 7:36 PM
Say what you really mean, Dave.
Odysseus on April 26, 2013 at 7:51 PM
Boom! take that unions..Sure would like to get those orange cupcakes and mini donuts back
sadsushi on April 26, 2013 at 8:24 PM
While I will be happy to see Hostess cakes back on the shelves, C. Dean Metropoulos is dumber than dumb. Why reopen/open ANY bakeries in non-Right-to-Work states? Sadly, I believe Hostess is doomed to repeat its untimely death. Best stock up, folks!
TXJenny on April 26, 2013 at 9:13 PM
worked for the air-traffic why not cupcakes.
losarkos on April 26, 2013 at 9:15 PM
I want a cheeseboiger and a Twinkie.
Sherman1864 on April 26, 2013 at 9:38 PM
Had a professor who took a dim view of the nutritional value (so to speak) of “junk food” in general.
His reasoning: “If mold won’t grow on a Twinkie, neither will you.”
AesopFan on April 26, 2013 at 11:31 PM
I am sure the old employes who want to work and don’t give a crap about the union that put them on the street could get a job with the new company.
You don’t need a union to work!
Delsa on April 26, 2013 at 11:43 PM
If I was the new owner of that company, I would relocate all of the plant and equipment in the newly minted right to work states, just to stick it in the eye of the unions. MI and IN come to mind.
karenhasfreedom on April 27, 2013 at 12:26 AM
Hooray for management. Unions were needed at one point in time, but no longer.
MN J on April 27, 2013 at 12:35 AM
I was already upset with Unions — and then they killed the Twinkie.
Axion on April 27, 2013 at 6:10 PM