Michigan lawmakers have not tried to solve union ‘free rider’ problem

One in three bills in Michigan in 2023 has been labor-related. None try to solve a long-claimed problem. Why?

By James David Dickson | March 20, 2023

One in every three bills submitted in Michigan this year has been labor-related. Yet none of them, zero, address the “free-rider” problem unions cite in right-to-work states.

The union argument is this: If people are represented by the union, but not required to pay it, they are free riders on its services.

Why, then, the lack of legislation correcting that problem? Not a single Michigan lawmaker has submitted a bill allowing nonpaying workers to disconnect entirely from the union.

Of the 88 bills submitted in the 102nd Legislature, 29 are labor-related.

Labor bills that have been submitted instead include:

House Bill 4233 would remove the prohibition against labor unions assisting in collecting dues from public school employees.
House Bill 4235 would make union dues tax refundable. Michigan taxpayers would be on the hook for their neighbors’ union dues.
House Bill 4240 would prohibit an employer from looking into a job applicant’s credit score.
Senate Bill 5 would require an agency fee for nonunion members.
Senate Bill 142 would require written job descriptions at firms with more than five employees.

Why would lawmakers leave a glaring problem unaddressed?

A 2018 memo on public policy priorities, co-authored by the AFSCME, AFT, NEA and SEIU labor unions, sheds light. The joint memo considers it counterproductive to solve the free-rider dilemma.

In the eyes of the union, to leave free-riders to negotiate for themselves is to break the union’s right to exclusive representation.

Steve Delie, director of the Workers For Opportunity initiative at the Mackinac Center, argues that unions don’t want to solve the free-rider dilemma.

“What they want to do is have the free rider problem be a cudgel that they can use to bully people into the union and to pay dues and to get rid of right-to-work,” Delie told CapCon.

While private sector opt-outs would take a change in federal law, “solving the free-rider problem in the public sector is relatively easy,” Delie said.

“You just do it.”

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.

Hohman: Michigan media asks the wrong questions, fosters bad policy

On roads, energy, schools and corporate welfare, bad questions lead to bad outcomes. These are four alternatives.

By James M. Hohman | March 20, 2023

These are four questions the Michigan media asks regularly. And this is what they should be asking instead.

How much do we need to spend to get the roads in good condition?

The better question is: “How much is needed to fix roads faster than they fall apart?”

Road maintenance is a dynamic system. Roads are constantly deteriorating, at varying rates, and we’re constantly repairing them, at varying rates.

The goal shouldn’t be to get roads to some arbitrary level of average quality over a short period of time. Lawmakers should instead shoot for getting to the level where they keep up with deterioration. Then they can ensure that the state is headed in the right direction, steadily fixing roads faster than they fall apart.

Michigan is already close to this point.

2. Are government-owned utilities better than privately-owned utilities?

The better question is: “What can we do to ensure affordable and reliable electricity?”

Public and private utilities operate under the same regulatory process. If the process is not delivering affordable and reliable electricity, that is a failure of the process. There are alternative frameworks if the current system isn’t working, like returning to a competitive market for electricity. That might be a better answer to the question of how people can get affordable, reliable electricity if regulation fails to provide it.

3. How much more money do schools need to be adequately funded?

The better question is: “What can we do to get better education outcomes?”

While schools clearly need funding to operate, the levels of funding don’t seem to play much of a role in determining school success. Schools do not necessarily do better for their students when they get more money. The things that matter most relate to teacher quality and student access to great teachers.

Policymakers shouldn’t need to force districts to adopt effective practices. Schools are run by elected school boards that are responsible for managing the district’s affairs. State lawmakers should focus on creating a policy environment that encourages schools to do better. That’s the theory behind school choice. Give people options, and they’ll select the ones that work best for themselves. If local school boards don’t offer good options, then parents can find alternatives.

Without this competition for students (and the funding that comes with them), there is little financial incentive for schools to improve. The education system currently increases funding by lobbying the Legislature rather than by producing good results.

Which is why the wrong question gets raised.

4. Should taxpayers hand out money to land the next big business project?

The better question is: “What can lawmakers do to make the state a better place to do business?”

The packages of cash and favors offered to companies to locate a business or office in the state are ostensibly intended to develop the economy. Lawmakers should discuss what they need to do to make their policies and services more conducive to economic growth, rather than how large a check to write to the next big project.

It’s understandable why people get the impression that these one-off projects are really important. Landing a facility comes with a lot of hype. Politicians throw around terms like “transformational” and “generational investment” to describe these projects. But these promises never deliver. Ever.

There’s not one state that can point to a corporate welfare deal as the reason it went from economic backwater to thriving commonwealth. And the biggest deals tend to flop the hardest.

The goal should be to make Michigan a more attractive place to start and run a business. People on the right tend to think that low taxes and light regulatory burden are the way to go.

People on the left tend to think that high-quality government services and a more equitable distribution of wealth will deliver. No one thinks that simply offering more favors to big companies than the next state is a good long-term strategy.

Policymakers keep having the wrong conversation. Asking the wrong questions has a way of producing the wrong answers.

James M. Hohman is director of fiscal policy for the Mackinac Center. Email him at hohman@mackinac.org.