<\/p>\n
Opinion pieces from National Right to Work Foundation experts are regularly featured in major publications across the country, including The Wall Street Journal<\/i><\/b>, USA Today<\/b><\/i>, New York Post<\/b><\/i>, The Detroit News<\/i><\/b>, and many others. Here are just a few pieces from the last decade that have shed light on Big Labor’s anti-worker freedom agenda:<\/p>\n \u201cUnion bosses’ bargaining powers are undermining government’s response to the coronavirus\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Washington Examiner<\/a>, 9\/7\/2020<\/p>\n \u201cIn the public sector, instead of allowing elected officials to respond and adapt quickly to crises such as COVID-19, monopoly bargaining forces local governments to \u2018bargain\u2019 with union officials over many changes, even those necessary to stem the virus\u2019s spread. Not only does this block needed reforms, but it is also inherently anti-democratic, forcing those elected to set public policy instead to \u2018negotiate\u2019 it with a special interest group whose aims often conflict with the public\u2019s interests.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cPolice Unions Protect Bad Cops, And Joe Biden Would Make It Worse\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Federalist<\/a>, 9\/7\/2020<\/p>\n \u201cYet unchecked budgets and debt are hardly the only negative impact of granting special-interest union bosses this special ability to dictate public policy. Under monopoly bargaining, all employees in a workplace, from deadbeats to star performers, are treated alike under a one-size-fits-all contract.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cTo address UAW corruption, target how union bosses harm rank and file\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Detroit News<\/a>, 9\/4\/2020<\/p>\n \u201cThese privileges allowed UAW fat cats to live worker-funded limousine lifestyles knowing that their revenue stream and bargaining power were largely insulated from the popular will of the very workers they claim to \u2018represent.\u2019 That\u2019s why any reforms, either as part of or to avoid a federal takeover of the UAW, should empower workers whose trust was so blatantly betrayed to hold union bosses accountable.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cVirginia politicians poised to hand even more power to aggressive tax-and-spend lobby\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Roanoke Times<\/a>, 2\/20\/2020<\/p>\n \u201cAlong with Virginia\u2019s Right to Work law, first enacted in 1947 and amended to furnish explicit protections for public employees in 1973, H.B.1872\/S.B.962 is a pillar of state policy. The two statutes operate in combination to ensure no public servant loses his or her job or is discriminated against in the workplace for refusal to join or pay dues or fees to a union.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cTrapped by the Teamsters\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Wall Street Journal<\/a>, 12\/8\/2019<\/p>\n \u201cUnion officials unable to win the support of a majority of the workers they purport to represent shouldn\u2019t maintain power solely because of bureaucratic rules. Instead, whenever enough workers file a petition to remove a union they oppose, the NLRB should simply let them vote.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cUAW strike shows union’s coercion and corruption go hand-in-hand\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Detroit News<\/a>, 10\/2\/2019<\/p>\n \u201cThe unfolding corruption scandal that has engulfed numerous top officials at the UAW is only the latest and a particularly blatant demonstration of an indisputable fact: Union officials frequently wield their government granted power to benefit themselves even at the expense of the rank-and-file workers they claim to represent. \u201cRight-to-work law boosts the Nevada economy\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Wall Street Journal<\/a>, 9\/1\/2019<\/p>\n \u201cThere is a reason Tesla\u2019s Gigafactory is located in Nevada and not California. A nationwide 2017 survey of business leaders conducted by Chief Executive magazine found that, by a 2-to-1 margin, CEOs prefer adding jobs in right-to-work states over other states.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cGovernments Must Secure Employees\u2019 Janus Rights\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix and William Messenger \u2013 The Wall Street Journal<\/a>, 8\/29\/2019<\/p>\n \u201cLabor Department figures suggest unconstitutional deductions could be coming out of the paychecks of as many as 7.2 million government employees nationwide. The fix is simple: Governments must cease transferring wages to unions until they amend their dues-deduction policies to comply with Janus<\/i>.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cBig labor won\u2019t respect Michigan workers\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Detroit News<\/a>, 3\/12\/2019<\/p>\n \u201cMichigan union bosses opposed right to Work before it even passed into law, and have regularly violated Wolverine State workers\u2019 rights to stop dues payments ever since. In fact, it was big labor\u2019s overreach in opposition to right to work that provided a final push towards Michigan\u2019s adoption of right to work.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cOn Labor Day, celebrate workers\u2019 First Amendment rights under Janus<\/i>\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Washington Examiner<\/a>, 9\/3\/2018<\/p>\n \u201cEvery public school teacher, police officer, firefighter, and civil servant in the nation now has the freedom to decide as an individual whether or not union officials deserve their financial support. This means government employees can withhold financial support from union officials that are corrupt or hold institutional interests that conflict with the individual\u2019s personal views.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cVoluntary, not coercive, unionism respects American values\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Hill<\/a>, 9\/3\/2018<\/p>\n \u201cImagine being forced to \u2018donate\u2019 your spare time to a local club or pay mandatory dues to your local Chamber of Commerce or Red Cross. Most people would bridle at having to contribute to organizations they may not be interested in supporting. Yet that is exactly how unions operate in many American workplaces.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cLabor unions don\u2019t deserve a stranglehold on new KCI terminal jobs\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Kansas City Star<\/a>, 5\/12\/2018<\/p>\n \u201cIf federal labor policy were not radically biased in favor of monopolistic unionism, then perhaps all construction employers and employees who wanted to bid on contracts for the [Kansas City International Airport] upgrade \u2014 regardless of union affiliation or the race or gender of the company\u2019s owner or employees \u2014 would be able to compete on a level playing field.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cOn Labor Day, Consider The Injustice of Forced Dues\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Investor’s Business Daily<\/a>, 9\/1\/2017<\/p>\n \u201cAs you watch your children board the school bus for the first day back to classes, consider this: If you don’t live in one of the 28 states with a Right to Work law, chances are that school bus driver is forced to pay fees to a union as a condition of driving that bus. The teachers at the school the bus is heading toward likely face the same choice: Pay money to the union or be fired.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cEnding the Obama labor board majority\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Washington Times<\/a>, 5\/25\/2017<\/p>\n \u201cAs more and more workers are protected by the now 28-state Right to Work laws, which prohibit forced dues and fees, union bosses desperate for new sources of forced-dues cash have concocted new and outrageous schemes \u2014 aided and abetted by the Obama NLRB.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cWant a tremendous deal on infrastructure spending? Suspend Davis-Bacon\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Hill<\/a>, 4\/26\/2017<\/p>\n \u201cThis outdated and wasteful law puts independent contractors and sub-contractors at a disadvantage in submitting proposals for federal projects \u2013 effectively barring nonunion workers from working on government-funded projects. By forcing bidding to follow union-dictated job classifications, work rules, compliance requirements and cherry-picked union pay scales, Davis-Bacon enables Big Labor to feed at the taxpayers\u2019 trough on federal construction projects.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cLabor Department ‘Blacklisting Rule’ Weaponizes Frivolous Union Allegations\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Investor’s Business Daily<\/a>, 10\/6\/2016<\/p>\n \u201cUnder the blacklisting rule, roughly 24,000 businesses employing nearly 30 million Americans could be frozen out of federal contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars annually solely because of union bosses’ allegations of \u2018anti-union activities\u2019 (translation: opposing forced unionism).\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cUnion Bosses: Our Permanent Incumbents\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 National Review Online<\/a>, 6\/16\/2016<\/p>\n \u201cVeteran officeholders are notoriously hard to unseat, but even our longest-serving politicians have to face the voters every few years in regularly scheduled elections. Incumbent union bosses are another story.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cShould Workers Be Forced To Pay Union Fees, Or Be Fired? Yes, Says Kamala Harris\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Daily Caller<\/a>, 1\/7\/2016<\/p>\n \u201cAs more and more workers are protected by the now 28-state Right to Work laws, which prohibit forced dues and fees, union bosses desperate for new sources of forced-dues cash have concocted new and outrageous schemes \u2014 aided and abetted by the Obama NLRB.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cDon\u2019t Impose Forced Unionism on Seattle Rideshare Drivers\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Daily Caller<\/a>, 12\/14\/2015<\/p>\n \u201cFaced with an American workforce of traditional employees who are largely uninterested in bringing a union into their relationship with their employer, Big Labor has spent considerable effort in recent years using union political influence to target new categories of Americans for forced unionism, including mandatory dues and fees to replenish union treasury funds. Previous targets have included home-based childcare business owners and even mothers who to take care of significantly disabled children.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cThink voluntary, not coercive, unions\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Daily Caller<\/a>, 5\/4\/2015<\/p>\n \u201cUnion officials\u2019 coercive power over employees, many of whom want nothing to do with a union, flies in the face of America\u2019s tradition of voluntarism and free association.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201c2014 Elections Show Voters Are Ready to Confront Big Labor\u2019s Special Privileges\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 CNS News<\/a>, 11\/9\/2014<\/p>\n \u201cAs more states look to rein in spending, protect employee rights, and challenge public sector unions\u2019 special privileges, reform-minded candidates across the country should recognize that voters will reward them for taking on Big Labor. In the 2014 midterms, the union bosses flexed their muscles and lost. Big Labor\u2019s failure to exact revenge should embolden pro-reform politicians across the country.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cRight to Work Right for Mainers\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 MaineWire<\/a>, 8\/16\/2014<\/p>\n \u201cNo person should be forced to financially support a private organization they do not support. However, union bosses enjoy special government-granted privileges to force thousands of Maine\u2019s workers just that. Imagine the outrage if everyone was forced to fund a political party, church, or a civic organization.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cWorkers not interested in unions\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Atlanta Journal-Constitution<\/a>, 3\/12\/2014<\/p>\n \u201cThe UAW\u2019s legal challenge isn\u2019t surprising. In fact, it\u2019s just the latest example of Big Labor\u2019s new approach to organizing. Instead of making a positive case to employees, union officials have increasingly turned to coercive and misleading tactics that jeopardize workers\u2019 rights.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cThe UAW\u2019s Southern strategy\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Human Events<\/a>, 10\/17\/2013<\/p>\n \u201cRegardless of the reasons, independent-minded workers across the Right to Work South are taking a stand against coercive unionization drives in their workplaces. These workers know what happened to Detroit and don\u2019t want Detroit-style unionization exported to their communities. As some Nissan workers in Canton wrote on their t-shirts, \u201cIf you want a union, move to Detroit.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cBig Labor, big spender\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 USA Today<\/a>, 9\/2\/2013<\/p>\n \u201cIf Big Labor was running as a presidential candidate, he or she would have outspent the Obama campaign<\/a> (the most expensive in history) more than two to one. In fact, the unions’ $1.7 billion political blitz is roughly equal to the combined spending of the Obama and Romney campaigns<\/a> ($1.17 billion) and both national parties<\/a> ($678 million) for the 2012 elections.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cUNION PUSH: VW workers, be wary of secret deals\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Chattanooga Times Free Press<\/a>, 4\/13\/2013<\/p>\n \u201cIn Chattanooga, like elsewhere, the endgame for UAW union bosses is to gain monopoly bargaining control over as many workers as possible. That is why VW\u2019s Chattanooga workers should be wary of what secret deal is behind the UAW\u2019s smokescreen before they, too, end up with a raw deal.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cWhat right to work would do for NY\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 New York Post<\/a>, 12\/12\/2012<\/p>\n \u201cOver the past decade, private-sector employment as measured by the Bureau of Economic Analysis grew by an average of 12.5 percent in Right to Work states. Meanwhile, New York\u2019s private sector-growth was just 8.8 percent. Indeed, Right to Work states as a whole have long outperformed on job creation, compared to compulsory-unionism states.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cCourt exempts union bosses from laws against identity theft\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 Washington Examiner<\/a>, 10\/27\/2012<\/p>\n \u201cImagine that. North Carolina’s courts have held that federal labor law pre-empts a completely unrelated state identity theft law, even though the U.S. Supreme Court has long held that a state retains jurisdiction where the conduct to be regulated touches deeply rooted local interests.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cKnox<\/i> Supreme Court Decision Strengthens Worker Rights\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 National Review Online<\/a>, 10\/3\/2012<\/p>\n \u201cKnox<\/i> gives hope that public employees will no longer have to interpret complex opt-out procedures to refrain from supporting union politics they may disagree with. Ironically enough, the prospect of actually asking nonunion employees for permission before spending their dues on politics is what SEIU operatives were so afraid of in 2005. Their strident political activism, paid for in part by unwilling nonunion employees, could lead to new Supreme Court precedents that protect workers\u2019 First Amendment rights while constraining union officials\u2019 special privileges.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cMark Mix: Union muscling in to O.C. hospital\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Orange County Register<\/a>, 4\/13\/2012<\/p>\n \u201cIn response to the union\u2019s coercive tactics, a majority of hospital workers signed cards, letters, and petitions stating that they do not want the SEIU union bosses\u2019 so-called \u201crepresentation.\u201d Instead of respecting the employees\u2019 wishes, [hospital] officials accepted SEIU officials as the workers\u2019 monopoly bargaining agents after a rigged \u201ccard count\u201d was held in November 2011.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n \u201cGovernment employees’ free speech on trial\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Washington Times<\/a>, 1\/9\/2012<\/p>\n \u201cIn 2005, SEIU<\/a> officials in California imposed a \u201cspecial assessment\u201d on all state civil servants in their bargaining unit – including those who were not union members – to defeat a ballot proposal that would have prevented public-sector unions from using forced dues for political contributions without employee consent. As in Wisconsin and Ohio, union operatives fought tooth and nail to protect their special privileges, but several courageous state employees didn\u2019t take this scheme lying down.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n \u201cBeyond Boeing: The Obama labor board’s forced-unionism agenda\u201d \u2013 Mark Mix \u2013 The Washington Times<\/a>, 10\/28\/2011<\/p>\n \u201cWhile the Boeing case is a visibly egregious assault on our enterprise system, it’s hardly the first, or even the latest, forced unionism power grab launched by the Obama Labor Board.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n2020<\/h2>\n
\n
2019<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\nIs the ongoing strike against GM another such an example?\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n2018<\/h2>\n
\n
2017<\/h2>\n
\n
2016<\/h2>\n
\n
2015<\/h2>\n
\n
2014<\/h2>\n
\n
2013<\/h2>\n
\n
2012<\/h2>\n
\n
<\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n
2011<\/h2>\n
\n