In response to the Wednesday letter, “State needs to be right to work”: I could not disagree more. Right-to-work states do not benefit workers, they benefit corporations. The writer is right in the fact that the Legislature in Michigan changed the law to be a right-to-work state in 2011 much to the dismay and massive protests of the citizens of Michigan. At the time the unemployment rate was at 8.9 percent; it is now at 9 percent two years later … big help doing that. I can certainly see where one would think that’s a good idea for the people of Michigan, it obviously created a lot more jobs by having those lower wages. Boeing would be smart to keep the production of the 777X in Washington state where the workers are highly trained and qualified to do the job. That “other” state they decided to go with is putting out “one,” yes, that’s right, “one” plane a month and guess who is making up the difference? Wait for it … yes, that’s right — the qualified workers in Washington state.
Boeing posts billions of profits every year as they are entitled to; they aren’t after all a non-profit organization. However, to consistently take away from the very people who actually put those profits in their pockets is unacceptable.
In regard to history, there is very good reason why unions were originally formed. To protect the workers from the shameful and awful working conditions they were forced to work in. While we may have many laws and regulations that protect workers today, it is because of the unions that we have these protections. There is something inherently wrong with the direction this country is moving.
Julie Barbeau
Marysville
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
