Home » News » Politics
Hundreds gather to fight right-to-work bill
|
CONCORD — About 300 people turned out Thursday to oppose a bill that would make New Hampshire the only right-to-work state in the Northeast.
Despite the opposition, House Bill 1677 does have the support of the two announced Republican gubernatorial candidates, Ovide Lamontagne and Kevin Smith, along with the backing of House Speaker William O'Brien, R-Mont Vermon.
O'Brien criticized Gov. John Lynch for vetoing the bill last year, saying he showed his lack of commitment to job creation and how much he owes to unions.
Opponents said the bill amounted to nothing more than union busting and one more in a long line of bills attacking middle class workers in a race to the bottom for wages and benefits.
David Lang, president of the Professional Fire Fighters Association of New Hampshire called the bill “bad for New Hampshire and bad for New Hampshire workers.”
He told the House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitation Services Committee, “look at the polls, look at the people here. New Hampshire is not for this.”
A similar bill passed the House and Senate last year, but was vetoed by Lynch. The House failed to override the veto by 13 votes.
House Bill 1677 would prohibit collective bargaining agreements from including provisions requiring all employees in a work place to pay union fees.
The bill would also eliminate the requirement that unions represent all employees, including non-union members in negotiations and in administering contracts.
Bill supporters said the bill gives state workers a choice, freedom of association and the right not to support something they oppose.
“My fundamental belief in liberty causes me to support this bill,” said Sen. James Forsythe, R-Strafford, a bill sponsor.
Lamontagne said he too supported the bill because of the freedom it gives the state's workers. “I will err on the side of the individual employee,” he said.
Smith said the time has come to pass the bill, although he acknowledged it would not bring immediate jobs.
Others touted the bill's economic advantages with several citing the move by Caterpillar from Canada to Indiana after that state passed right-to-work legislation last week.
“This means over 450 new, high-paying jobs for Indiana's workers, as well as hundreds of additional spin-off jobs from the presence of the plant,' said O'Brien.
But bill opponents countered that states with right-to-work laws have lower wages and benefits and do not create any more jobs than New Hampshire, which is already near the top in job creation, low unemployment and wages.
They cited testimony by Lynch and the commissioners of Labor, and Resources and Economic Development saying not one company they had talked to mentioned right-to-work as a consideration in moving to New Hampshire.
“This system works well for our communities and the state. It is not broken, so please don't try to fix it,” said New Hampshire AFL-CIO President Mark MacKenzie. “This legislation will only create chaos and confusion where we now have a workable and orderly process.”
Several speakers questioned why they were talking about the issue once again after the long, bitter and contentious debate last session.
“Right-to-work has been deliberated, vetted and defeated,” said Rep. Mary Gorman, D-Nashua. “Let's get back to the job of creating a robust economy for our citizenry and our state.”
But the bill's prime sponsor, Rep. William Smith, R-New Castle, said the bill is to ensure union members have influence over their “union bosses,” and to make sure those bosses negotiate in the best interest of all their members.
“This is not an anti-union bill, it's a pro-member bill,” Smith said, as most of the 300 people laughed loudly.
If the bill is approved, New Hampshire would become the 24th state to have a right-to-work law.
Despite the opposition, House Bill 1677 does have the support of the two announced Republican gubernatorial candidates, Ovide Lamontagne and Kevin Smith, along with the backing of House Speaker William O'Brien, R-Mont Vermon.
O'Brien criticized Gov. John Lynch for vetoing the bill last year, saying he showed his lack of commitment to job creation and how much he owes to unions.
Opponents said the bill amounted to nothing more than union busting and one more in a long line of bills attacking middle class workers in a race to the bottom for wages and benefits.
David Lang, president of the Professional Fire Fighters Association of New Hampshire called the bill “bad for New Hampshire and bad for New Hampshire workers.”
He told the House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitation Services Committee, “look at the polls, look at the people here. New Hampshire is not for this.”
A similar bill passed the House and Senate last year, but was vetoed by Lynch. The House failed to override the veto by 13 votes.
House Bill 1677 would prohibit collective bargaining agreements from including provisions requiring all employees in a work place to pay union fees.
The bill would also eliminate the requirement that unions represent all employees, including non-union members in negotiations and in administering contracts.
Bill supporters said the bill gives state workers a choice, freedom of association and the right not to support something they oppose.
“My fundamental belief in liberty causes me to support this bill,” said Sen. James Forsythe, R-Strafford, a bill sponsor.
Lamontagne said he too supported the bill because of the freedom it gives the state's workers. “I will err on the side of the individual employee,” he said.
Smith said the time has come to pass the bill, although he acknowledged it would not bring immediate jobs.
Others touted the bill's economic advantages with several citing the move by Caterpillar from Canada to Indiana after that state passed right-to-work legislation last week.
“This means over 450 new, high-paying jobs for Indiana's workers, as well as hundreds of additional spin-off jobs from the presence of the plant,' said O'Brien.
But bill opponents countered that states with right-to-work laws have lower wages and benefits and do not create any more jobs than New Hampshire, which is already near the top in job creation, low unemployment and wages.
They cited testimony by Lynch and the commissioners of Labor, and Resources and Economic Development saying not one company they had talked to mentioned right-to-work as a consideration in moving to New Hampshire.
“This system works well for our communities and the state. It is not broken, so please don't try to fix it,” said New Hampshire AFL-CIO President Mark MacKenzie. “This legislation will only create chaos and confusion where we now have a workable and orderly process.”
Several speakers questioned why they were talking about the issue once again after the long, bitter and contentious debate last session.
“Right-to-work has been deliberated, vetted and defeated,” said Rep. Mary Gorman, D-Nashua. “Let's get back to the job of creating a robust economy for our citizenry and our state.”
But the bill's prime sponsor, Rep. William Smith, R-New Castle, said the bill is to ensure union members have influence over their “union bosses,” and to make sure those bosses negotiate in the best interest of all their members.
“This is not an anti-union bill, it's a pro-member bill,” Smith said, as most of the 300 people laughed loudly.
If the bill is approved, New Hampshire would become the 24th state to have a right-to-work law.