Analysis

Michigan’s largest unions have seen plummeting membership over the past decade

Jobs and incomes are up, workplace injuries are down

In recent years, most of Michigan’s largest labor unions saw massive declines in membership, despite significant job growth in most industries. The reason? A decade with right-to-work law, which gave workers the ability to choose whether to join a union, as a member or through a fee, or not.

The reports many labor unions are required to file with the federal government reveal the state of labor union membership, as do reports from the Michigan Civil Service Commission. Every one of Michigan’s 15 largest unions or so has seen a decline, whether in state government, schools, local government, or private industries such as construction or food service. But the declines are uneven. A variety of AFSCME associations, representing mostly state and local government workers, have seen a loss of more than half their members. The SEIU, which mostly represents workers in health care and local government, is down nearly 70%.

Despite job gains in the auto sector over the past decade and a highly publicized strike last year, the UAW branches in Michigan have lost 16,000 members over the past decade. Other private sector unions have seen fewer losses. These include the United Food and Commercial Workers (-8.7%), Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters (-6.8%), the Operating Engineers (-2.5%) and Michigan Nurses Association (-3.7%).

Losses in the public sector are much more pronounced than those in the private sector. The Michigan Education Association has now lost more than 38,000 members, or one-third, since the right-to-work law went into effect in 2013. The American Federation of Teachers branch, the bulk of which is in the Detroit Federation of Teachers, is down more than 25%. The Michigan public school system added 27,000 employees since 2012, but its largest employee unions have lost a combined 45,000 members.

The total number of public sector union members in Michigan has dropped by 80,000 since the right-to-work law was passed. Unions representing state of Michigan employees are down by more than one-third.

That may soon change. The Democratic-led Michigan Legislature repealed the state’s right-to-work law in 2023. The UAW and other unions representing workers for private employers can now require them to rejoin or pay fees. A 2018 ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court means that public sector employees such as schoolteachers still have the right to decline paying or joining a union.

Repealing the law is expected to boost union membership and financial support for the Democratic Party. In fighting in 2012 against a law allowing workers to opt out, SEIU Healthcare Michigan President Marge Faville said unions needed the forced funds to “make sure Democrats get [elected].” Just before legislators voted to enact a right-to-work law, a local Michigan Education Association leader sent an email out on a public server to tell other public school employees that “[emergency management] is the future in Michigan with a Republican governor and Legislature” and union members need to “[get] everyone we know to vote for Democrats.”

In the run-up to the law, opponents of right-to-work claimed there would be dire consequences. President Barack Obama predicted there would be fewer jobs and lower incomes, as did Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (then a state senator) and others. State Rep. Brandon Dillon said “workplace safety accidents” would “skyrocket.” UAW President Bob King said right-to-work would “destroy ... the middle class.”

None of these predictions bore out. From 2012 to 2022, Michigan incomes increased from $55,140 to $61,683, despite the COVID recession — an increase of more than $6,000 per year after inflation. Median household income went from $45,859 to $63,498, or 15% above inflation. Michigan added 382,000 jobs. Occupational injuries declined by 28%.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.

News Story

Whitmer seeks federal emergency laws to cover mild winter

Warm weather casts doubt on Michigan’s future as haven from warm weather

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is seeking Washington’s help in dealing with the consequences of a mild winter.

“There is no denying it,” Whitmer wrote in letter sent to Capitol Hill leaders April 3. “We are facing an unprecedented problem resulting in a devastating impact on our businesses and regional economies.”

The governor is seeking an easier path for Michigan businesses to receive federal Small Business Administration relief for revenues lost to warmer weather. This winter’s below-average snowfall and warmer temperatures proved challenging for various businesses, including ski resorts, dog racing events and ice fishing suppliers. “I write to you—our nation’s federal legislators and administrators—and request that you develop regulatory or legislative solutions that can ensure businesses impacted by an exceptionally ‘warm winter’ can seek appropriate federal relief,” Whitmer writes.

The three-page letter, addressed to majority and minority leadership of the House and Senate, says the state is plagued by drought and wrestling with “the lasting impact of record high winter temperatures.” Whitmer described herself as hamstrung by America’s failure to treat warm weather and clear skies as disasters on the order of earthquakes, tornadoes and hurricanes.

“I am pleased that the drought declarations are providing relief in 43 counties across Michigan, as well as scores of counties across Minnesota and Wisconsin,” Whitmer wrote. “However, this solution is not designed for the problem at hand, and the truth is we do not have a reliable or well-tailored tool for federal relief for businesses devastated by unseasonably warm winters. As governor, I do not have the ability to draw down any federal funds by declaring a ‘warm winter‘ or ‘no snow’ disaster, as I do for declaring other disasters like storms or droughts. And where I do have the ability to declare for droughts, I am limited to only the severest levels of drought, which has left many counties in Michigan uncovered by any sort of federal SBA relief this winter, although they are feeling the impact just as much as their neighboring counties.”

The governor’s office did not respond to email and phone requests for comment.

The grim tone of Whitmer’s letter contrasts with her previous suggestions that global warming will turn Michigan into a climate haven.

“We know that people are going to migrate because of climate,” Whitmer said during a tour of the Upper Peninsula last summer. Though Michigan’s state population growth has been stagnant-to-negative in recent years, the governor promised that droughts and wildfires around the nation could reverse that trend. “Our goal is to just strategically grow our population in the immediate, knowing that ultimately, we will be one of these states where people are seeking refuge.”

At other times, Whitmer has struck a more apocalyptic tone of a climate-induced population increase, saying the state’s natural resources are at stake.

“The whole world is going to want to come here or take our water,” she said during a gubernatorial debate in 2022. “We cannot let that happen. But what we can do is have a strategic plan for population growth and management of our natural resources.”

Though the governor’s request for federal money drew bipartisan support, some policy experts warn that expanding the definition of an emergency could have serious consequences for budgeting and the separation of powers.

It is highly probable that federal lawmakers intentionally left warm winters out of the emergency statute because they did not think such events fit commonsense definitions of a natural disaster, said Daniel Dew, legal policy director at the Pacific Research Institute.

“If these issues are a persistent problem that Congress has time to legislate, then that’s how this should be done, rather than just passing a law that allow governors to declare an emergency,” Dew told Michigan Capitol Confidential. “There is no triggering event, even though a lack of snow drastically impacts the bottom line of some businesses. How do you draw the line and make the law precise enough? Regardless of the wisdom of such a policy, how do you draft it in a way that it can’t be taken advantage of? Suppose you have a surfing community that makes its money from the surfing business, but one summer there’s not enough wind or no big waves. Is that community in a state of emergency? It's hard to see any limiting principle.”

Whitmer’s call for federal relief also overlooks the many activities — such as golfing and boating — that benefit from milder weather, said Mike Van Beek, director of research at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. He added that warm winter emergencies pave the way for even more frivolous claims.

“Gov. Whitmer is asking the federal government to open a can of worms,” Van Beek told Michigan Capitol Confidential. “If a mild Michigan winter can turn on the emergency funds spigot, there will be no end to the bad weather pleadings from other states and governors. But who will determine which common weather event deserves emergency funding?”

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.