Guest column: Right to Work is no guarantee of economic success

By Timothy J. Bartik/W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research

Will “Right to Work” boost Michigan’s economic development? What does research say?

Research suggests that the economic development effects of RTW are uncertain, with downside risks. Some studies find RTW boosts job growth, while other studies do not. Some studies find RTW reduces wages, while other studies do not. Precise predictions of RTW’s effects on per-capita earnings, which should be a primary goal for state policy, are not available.

The challenge to estimating RTW’s effects is that the states with Right to Work have not varied much over time. For the last 50 years, RTW has mostly been in the same Southern (and some Western) states. Southern states have had faster job  and wage growth than the North. But is this due to RTW, or other Southern characteristics? That is hard to say. Southern states also have lower wages than the North. But whether this is due to RTW is also hard to say.

Timothy J. Bartik is a senior economist for the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, an independent, nonpartisan research organization in Kalamazoo.

Most regional economists think that the South’s rise is due less to Right to Work than to economic “fundamentals.” For example, the development of air conditioning made the South a more attractive place to live and work.

To control for the many factors other than Right to Work which affect economic development, some studies have compared border counties in RTW states with adjacent counties in non-RTW states. Presumably adjacent counties are similar in other location factors. These “border” studies have tended to find some association of RTW laws with a greater share of county employment in manufacturing, particularly manufacturing that uses more labor relative to capital equipment (more “labor-intensive” manufacturing). But while one border study found that RTW counties have faster overall manufacturing growth, another border study could not find any overall manufacturing growth effect. Furthermore, because labor-intensive industries, such as apparel manufacturing, tend to pay lower wages, a greater mix of such industries would be expected to lower wages.

Other studies have focused on Idaho and Oklahoma. Prior to Indiana and Michigan adopting Right to Work in 2012, Idaho and Oklahoma were the most recent states to adopt it -- Idaho in 1985 and Oklahoma in 2001. It is possible to do some “before” and “after” analysis with these two states, which we can’t do (at least with recent data) for most other RTW states. One study finds that RTW was associated with an increased manufacturing share of employment in Idaho, but not in Oklahoma. However, some studies also find that Right to Work in Idaho and Oklahoma was associated with lower wages for non-union workers. Because Right to Work makes it harder to unionize a firm, non-union firms don’t face as much pressure to increase wages in order to avoid being unionized.

Even if we knew the effects of Right to Work in Idaho or Oklahoma, it is unclear whether such findings could be generalized to Michigan. Michigan has a quite different industrial structure from Idaho and Oklahoma.

Indiana reaction belies pro-Right to Work claims

Labor says it will prevail, but RTW experts are skeptical

Political fallout from RTW deal yet to land

If RTW laws have uncertain or detrimental effects on economic development, what alternative economic development policies are backed by stronger evidence?

Better economic development policies address a state’s economic fundamentals that affect the climate for high-wage job growth. For example, studies suggest that increased skills of a state’s labor force will increase both job growth and wages. Lower tax costs and other costs for growth of high-wage businesses also can increase both job growth and wages.

Both job growth and higher wages should be addressed by economic development policies.

Bridge welcomes guest columns from a diverse range of people on issues relating to Michigan and its future. The views and assertions of these writers do not necessarily reflect those of Bridge or The Center for Michigan.

Like what you’re reading in Bridge? Please consider a donation to support our work!

We are a nonprofit Michigan news site focused on issues that impact all citizens. In an era of click bait and biased news, we focus on taking the time to learn both sides of a story before we post it. Bridge stories are always free, but our work costs money. If our journalism helps you understand and love Michigan more, please consider supporting our work. It takes just a moment to donate here.

Pay with VISA Pay with MasterCard Pay with American Express Donate now

Comment Form

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.


Paul T
Tue, 01/08/2013 - 2:13pm
What about restrictive labor laws passed, say, decades ago? Did those "have uncertain or detrimental effects on economic development"?
Tue, 01/08/2013 - 8:49pm
A couple of issues that seem to be avoided in most discussions about RTW. First, is there not a freedom issue? It is very difficult to be a teacher, a State worker, a law enforcement officer, an auto company worker, etc. in the State of Michigan without being subject to union influence of all types including membership. Second, lately unions have been using their financial resources in an attempt to embed their interests in the State Consititution. These issues are more important than the effect on the State economy.
J A Reyes
Tue, 01/08/2013 - 11:10pm
I've lived in the South where there are quite a number RTW states and there is nothing about them that is better. Workers earn less money and have less power in their jobs. There are no protections in place for workers if their employers are less than ethical. So the only thing that Michigan has done in emulating Indiana is to race to the bottom. And I am really tired of people constantly treating unions as bad guys. Unions gave workers the forty hour work week, a minimum wage, worked for health benefits and workman's compensation, overtime pay and safety regulations. The things that most anti-union critics take for granted. I suppose the anti-union critics would rather bring back working conditions from the 19th century.