The right-to-work issue, with support from a Kokomo senator, is set to be revived as a major topic at the Statehouse early next year, but some economic experts are questioning what the law would do, if anything.
Sen. Jim Buck, a Republican from Kokomo, on Wednesday joined Sen. Jim Banks of Columbia City and Jonathan Williams, American Legislative Exchange Council tax policy director, to support legislation that would prohibit companies from entering union contracts that require employees to pay union dues.
The trio, among its recommendations to improve the state’s economy, said right-to-work would bring in more businesses.
Criticized by opponents as “right-to-work for less,” the form of legislation has been around for decades and is in effect in 22 states. The topic ignited Indiana House Democrats’ five-week walkout in early 2011.
Kokomo union leaders have promised that if the issue returns this year — Republican majority leaders have said it would — then they will return to the Statehouse for protests.
One of the most common arguments in favor of a right-to-work law suggests companies pass over Indiana when looking for places to move or expand because they don’t want to deal with unions. Opponents, meanwhile, commonly argue that right-to-work breaks down unions and lowers wages.
But there appears to be no concrete data strong enough to prove that right-to-work actually improves — or hinders — a state’s economy, said Michael Hicks, director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University.
Too many other variables throw off a solid conclusion, said Hicks, who is finishing a research study that examines other research findings on the issue.
That could leave the debate leaning less on objective evidence and more on questions of ethics and morals: Is it OK for a company to require an employee to join a union?
Hicks said there are too many economic factors in each state to determine whether right-to-work actually affected economics. Many states that have enacted the laws already had low corporate taxes, better qualities of life and other variables that would attract business.
“There are factors besides right-to-work that matter,” he said. “Some are policy matters. ... Some are just that the weather in Georgia beats the weather in Michigan most of the time. Since air conditioning became more readily available over time, people are more likely to move to Georgia than Michigan, so manufacturing would grow in Georgia.”
Jeb Conrad, president and CEO of the Greater Kokomo Economic Development Alliance, said he has discussed Indiana’s union laws “rarely, maybe once” with companies that were looking at the area.
Business leaders have mostly been concerned about work force availability and skills, operating costs, utilities and taxes.
“It’s really been a minimal issue,” Conrad said about Indiana’s union laws.
He continued to say there may be companies that might conduct preliminary research and rule out Indiana. An Internet search engine can show within seconds that Indiana is non-right-to-work.
“At the end of the day, it’s bigger than just Kokomo and Howard County,” he said. “From an [economic development] perspective, I want to know if we are well-positioned as a state, which according to all of the recognition that we’ve been given ... is [right-to-work] going to change that? We all want to be best, first.”
Conrad noted that recent recognition has shown Indiana’s current policies are working.
Area Development Magazine recently ranked Indiana fifth on its list of “Top States for Doing Business in 2011.”
Rich Boruff, president of United Auto Workers Local 685, Kokomo’s largest union, said the ranking is evidence against right-to-work.
“If we’re the fifth-most lucrative state to attract manufacturing ... why are we messing with that?” he asked.