Sherk ‘11 (Right to Work Increases Jobs and Choices;

Nov 9, 2011)
https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/right-work-increases-jobs-and-choices
Research shows that union organizing falls 50 percent within five years of a state passing a
right-to-work law.
C1
The Center for Union Facts reviewed the annual financial disclosure reports for the period 2010 to 2017 that unions filed with the Labor
Department. The results are a bit shocking. Labor
union political spending amounted to $1.3 billion of union dues
that were allocated to political activities, activist groups, media organizations, and nonprofits. And if you're
wondering exactly how much money do unions give to Democrats? The answer is over $400 million went to Democratic
organizations that include America Votes, the Democratic Governors Association, Catalist, the Economic Policy Institute and the list goes
on. Yet, approximately 40 percent of all union members and their household members vote Republican.
Funding for Planned Parenthood is even on the list, thus impacting employees' religious rights. The unions have publicly admitted they spend
money in a way that doesn't consider the viewpoints of its members. Wasteful union spending is par for the course. TheNFL Players
Association (NFLPA) spent more than $3.5 million to defend quarterback Tom Brady against a 4-game
suspension. This was the arbitration case called "Deflategate" in which footballs were found to be deflated. The union spokesman says the
legal fees weren't funded by employee dues, but rather by royalties paid to the union for NFL items sold. However, how would some of your
employees, union members or not, feel knowing the unions are willing to spend such extravagant amounts for such a situation. It reflects a
very poor judgment on the part of the union leaders

https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1242&context=empl_research#:~:text=Especiall
y%20for%20low%20wages%2C%20outsourcing,of%20just%20these%20four%20occupations.

Figure 2 shows the main estimates of outsourcing’s effect on wages. While

wages of both groups of workers move in
parallel up to the year of outsourcing (year 0 in the fi gure), they drop for the outsourced workers as soon
as outsourcing occurs by about 2.5 percent. The wage differential then keeps growing until it reaches
about 10 percent, approximately 5–10 years after outsourcing. This suggests large and long-lasting wage differentials
between outsourced and in-house jobs. Since these differences also imply that outsourcing may lead to substantial cost savings to employers,
we investigate whether fi rms that pay higher wages relative to the market have a higher likelihood of outsourcing any of their labor services,
and we do indeed fi nd that fi rms are signifi cantly more likely to do so the more they pay above market-level wages

Furthermore, Cohut 20 finds wages decreases are deadly: a decrease in wages and the subsequent
increase of financial problems increases feelings of despair and hopelessness that encourages self-harm
– indeed, a $1 decrease in wages leads to an extra 14 thousand deaths via self-harm.

(Reed 3) https://fee.org/articles/labor-freedom-makes-sense/

They calculate that unions

have cost the U.S. economy $50 trillion over the past half-century. By distorting
the price of labor and imposing inefficient work rules, Vedder and Gallaway argue, union policies constitute a
steady drain on resources and overall productivity: “The deadweight economic losses are not one-shot impacts on
the economy. What our simulations reveal is the powerful effect of the compounding over more than half a century
of what appears at first to be small annual effects.”

Orechwa, Walter. 2021 “The true cost of unionization.” IRI Consultants.

https://projectionsinc.com/unionproof/the-cost-of-unionization-2/#t1625509246523
The additional costs are real. The real estate firm Related, located in New York, sued construction unions because the unions were
inflating costs by $100,000. The lawsuit said the company was being forced to pay up to $70 an hour for someone to pick up coffee.
The union’s own financial struggles were being passed along to employers. Unnecessary high costs like
this were a product of inefficient union work rules requiring more workers than necessary and New York’s prevailing wage law.
While this is just one example, New York’s construction unions are not the only unions that have a problem because their retirement funds are
in crisis. Unions need new members and younger workers to support retiring workers. In this case, in a completely legal scheme, New York’s
construction unions
were setting wage rates based not on costs or market rates but on their own need to fill
their coffers. Gray estimates that the total additional annual operating expenses for an organization with
a union presence range from $900,000 (for a company with 100 employees) to more than $4,000,000 (for a company
with as many as 2000 employees.) These estimates do not include wages and benefits but do include items such as: 11. additional training on
managing in a union environment 12. additional Human Resources training and administrative support 13. ongoing legal fees 14. cost of
arbitrations 15. handling of grievances 16. time spent in negotiations with each contract renewal 17. lost productivity due to union work rules
18. strike contingency planning to reassure customers. Extending the research out to 10 years post-unionization, the Employment Policy
Foundation (EPF) stated that a unionized company’s output per employee is 2.4 percent less than a union-free
competitor if that unionized company experiences just a .25 percent reduction in productivity. The EPF
concluded that, unless the unionized company could sell their product at a higher price or other cost savings could be attained, the
unionized company is likely to see 14 percent less in profits per labor hour than their non-union
competitor.

Companies go elsewhere to reduce costs

(Miah 4) https://againstthecurrent.org/atc110/p411/

Outsourcing of course is not new. It involves moving work from one company to another that can do the same job at a lower cost. Generally, it
is domestic movement: from a union shop paying $20 an hour with benefits to a nonunion shop paying
$10 an hour with few benefits. The “jobless recovery” and the loss of higher paying tech and engineering
jobs to India and China has added the new term “offshoring”–outsourcing in new clothes–to the front pages of the media.
While many pro-outsourcing executives blame the educational deficiencies in the United States, the actual issue is much less complex: Engineers
in India are paid one-tenth or less as in Silicon Valley or Boston. This is cheap labor power, not inferior brainpower. The
corporate
executives, who are not politicians, are not used to speaking double talk. They are very clear in why they support
outsourcing and offshoring. “There is no job that is America’s God-given right anymore,” said Carly Fiorina,
Chairman and CEO of Hewlett Packard, to the March 7 San Francisco Chronicle in a center-spread business section with interviews
of Silicon Valley executives on the issue. “What’s an American company? We do half our business internationally. Does that
make us an international company or a U.S. company?” added Scott McNealy, Chairman and CEO Sun
Microsystems. “When you can get great talent at twenty percent of the costs, it isn’t about waving the
American flag. It’s about doing what’s right to have a good company,” said Carol Bartz, President,
Chairman and CEO AutoDesk. ”U.S. corporations’ first responsibility is to their shareholders. You cannot say, `I’m going to put national
interests ahead of shareholders interests,” declared John Thompson, Chairman and CEO Symantec Corp. In addition, Robert Crandall, a
former CEO at American Airlines, told USA Today, “Labor can either work for rates that allow for very low
pricing, or they won’t be working for very long.”

Outsourcing saves money

(Boskamp 22)
https://www.zippia.com/advice/outsourcing-statistics/#:~:text=What%20percentage%20of%20U.S.%20c
ompanies,one%20department%20of%20their%20organization.

Outsourcing can cut labor costs by up to 90%. Overseas outsourcing can help U.S. companies save 70% to 90% in labor
costs. The biggest savings are seen when work is outsourced to countries with a low cost of living, like the Philippines. 8 in 10 small businesses
in the United States plan to outsource work this year to save their organization time and money. Large businesses are 128% more likely to
outsource work than small businesses. 29% of businesses with 50 or fewer employees outsource work compared to 66% of businesses with
more than 50 employees. More than half of America’s large businesses outsource. Data illustrates that 68% of large consumer
products companies in the United States use outsourcing. The overall outsourcing market is expected to
grow at a compound annual growth rate of 4% between 2012 and 2025. Experts predict the overall international outsourcing
market to increase at a CAGR of 4% over the next four years. At that rate, the market is on track to grow by $40.16 billion by 2025. 8 million
American manufacturing jobs were outsourced between 1979-2009. While outsourcing grows, some
industries are suffering in the U.S. Outsourcing has taken a toll on the American manufacturing industry in particular. The
manufacturing market lost 8 million American workers between 1979 and 2009, with roughly 19.5 million jobs in June 1979 and only 11.5
million in December 2009. Additionally, manufacturing plants have declined by 12.5% between 1998 and 2008, with 51,000 plants closing their
doors across the country. Despite increasing costs, few American companies (4%) plan to relocate outsourced jobs back to the United States.
While the cost gap between the United States and China is decreasing (meaning that outsourcing costs are increasing), few companies plan on
bringing jobs back to the U.S. Only 4% of large American companies plan to bring outsourced jobs back to the United States according to a
Duke’s School of Business survey. 70% of surveyed companies plan to outsource more work in the near future. The large majority of companies
plan to outsource more in the future. Moreover, 35% plan to significantly increase the number of jobs they outsource.
Roughly 30 million
jobs are vulnerable to outsourcing. More than one-fifth of jobs in the United States have the potential to
be lost to outsourcing, according to a Princeston study.

Rtw states have more jobs

OTTO Motors, 5-18-2017, "Right-to-Work Draws Manufacturers and Boosts Employment,"

https://ottomotors.com/blog/right-to-work-policy-manufacturers

Forty-one years ago, 19 states prohibited the termination of employees for refusal to join or pay fees to
an unwanted union*. According to the U.S. Labor Department, 26.4% of nationwide employment in manufacturing at
that time was located within those 19 states. All of these states have since continuously offered right-to-work protections for
employees. To correlate the protections, the share of U.S. employment at manufacturing facilities in those 19 states
rose by 4.5% from 1985 to 2005. By 2006, the total manufacturing-establishment employment share of
the then-22 right to work states was 36.9%. The growth of manufacturing in these states reveals a link between areas
that feature pro-business policies and the increase in manufacturing jobs.

(NRTWC 22) https://nrtwc.org/right-to-work-states-lead-manufacturing-rebound/

Last year, according to data compiled by the U.S. Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), manufacturing
payroll
employment in Right to Work states rose by 150,000, or 2.3%. In both percentage and absolute terms, this was
roughly triple the overall increase for the 23 remaining states where firing employees simply for refusal
to pay union dues or fees is still permitted. Viewed over longer periods, the economic contrast between Right to Work and
compulsory-unionism states is even more stark. For example, from 2011-21, the 22 states that had Right to Work protections
for the entire decade saw a total increase of 9.3% in private-sector manufacturing employment. That
represents a gain of over 400,000 jobs. Over the same period, the five states that switched from forced unionism to Right to Work between 2012
and 2017 — Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Kentucky — saw their factory payrolls’ grow by 11.3%, or 188,000. Pre-Right to
Work, none of these states was regarded an economic powerhouse.

Rtw raises employment

(Austin 21) https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/matthew-lilley/files/long-run-effects-right-to-work.pdf

In recent decades, states with Right-To-Work (RTW) laws have experienced higher employment and population
growth than states without such laws. We investigate the extent to which these patterns, and other related labor market
phenomena, are causally explained by these laws and closely related policies. Using border-pair differences, we find RTW laws are
associated with a 3.2 percentage point increase in the manufacturing share of employment. This increase in
manufacturing does not merely crowd out other economic activity; we find that people who live in RTW regions have 1.6 percentage
points higher employment, 1.4 percentage points higher labor force participation, and 0.34 percentage
points lower disability receipt than residents of similar non-RTW areas. However, wages and labor compensation do
not appear to be lower on average. An important complication of administrative-border based regression discontinuity strategies is that multiple
policies, not just RTW laws, can change discontinuously at state borders. Thus, our method captures the combined effects of
RTW and other policies that change at RTW borders. We return to this issue, to verify the extent to which the differences in
outcomes we observe appear to be attributable to RTW laws, in depth later. Specifically, we utilise double machine learning techniques to assess
the effect of RTW while allowing for outcomes to be affected by a flexible nonlinear function of a battery of other policy controls. We
consistently find that the RTW-border differences we observe appear to be driven by RTW and not our other
policy controls.

Brian Balfour, 4-18-2022, "Right-to-Work Laws a Boon to Manufacturing," John Locke Foundation,
https://www.johnlocke.org/right-to-work-laws-a-boon-to-manufacturing/

“We found that states with right-to-work protections have a higher employment share in certain industries,
such as manufacturing and construction, as a percentage of total private employment. Notably, states that
have enacted these laws since 2000 have a 20.7% higher manufacturing share than they otherwise would
without a right-to-work law.”

Rtw states gain jobs, and forced unionism states lose jobs

(Bessler 22)
https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/data-jobs-continue-to-flow-from-pro-union-states-like-illinois-
to-right-to-work/article_9a733172-307f-11ed-b45d-471b5d3f43ff.html

Jobs continue to pour out of pro-union states like Illinois and into states with more free-market policies, a report based on Bureau of Labor
Statistics data shows. Right-to-work (RTW) states have added 1.3 million jobs since 2020, while non-RTW states
lost 1.1 million jobs, according to a study by economist Todd Nesbit and public policy analyst Michael LaFaive. RTW laws bar the
termination of an employee for refusal to pay union dues if they don't want to. “During the pandemic, there was a huge
out-migration from states like Illinois, New York, New Jersey and California into the southern states like
Texas, Florida, North Carolina an others, and all of those states happen to be right-to-work,” said Lee Schalk,
vice president of policy at the American Legislative Exchange Council. Schalk notes that Illinois recently lost major companies like Caterpillar and
Boeing to right-to-work states. The report found that 16 of the 28 RTW states have now fully recovered the jobs
lost during the pandemic, a distinction Illinois cannot claim. Of the non-RTW states, only Colorado and
Montana have recovered all the lost jobs.

Unions heavily influence politics

(Becher 18) https://www.daniel-stegmueller.com/papers/Becher_Stegmueller_JOP2018.pdf

The power of labor unions to influence elections and lawmaking is a central concern in the study of democratic representation. Research
in
political science, economics, and sociology has commonly conceived of union power in the political arena
as a question of aggregate group size, assuming that more members bring more votes and, perhaps, money. For instance, scholars have
examined the effect of unionization on legislative voting in the United States Congress (Box-Steffensmeier et al. 1997; Freeman and Medoff
1984; Kau and Rubin 1978; Seltzer 1995). Related
research examines the macro-level relationship between
unionization and outcomes such as turnout, economic policy, political equality, or poverty (Bartels 2008; Brady
et al. 2013; Flavin 2016; Leighley and Nagler 2007; Radcliff and Davis 2000). This research views unions mainly through the lens of aggregate
membership numbers, ignoring other organizational features. A recent review concludes that existing studies “commonly sum together
membership over many different unions with the implicit assumption that organizational characteristics do not matter” (Southworth and
Stepan-Norris 2009: 310). In this p aper, we argue that focusing solely on membership size provides an incomplete account of the organizational
basis of union political power, and it significantly limits our broader understanding of political representation. Specifically, we develop and
empirically assess the argument that the influence of unions on national lawmakers has significant roots in their local organization. We propose
a novel hypothesis about the
link between district-level union structure and lawmaking. It states that the horizontal
distribution of union members across local units within a congressional district – a feature we call
concentration – shapes legislative voting: representatives elected in districts where union members are relatively concentrated
should be less supportive of union positions than representatives elected in districts where an equal number of union members is dispersed
across several unions. Theoretically, the hypothesis that membership concentration reduces union political power is controversial. To motivate
it, we draw on foundational theories of collective action that point to the importance of selective social incentives in groups for political action
(Olson 1965) and seminal behavioral research on the political significance of social interactions in local unions (Berelson et al. 1954). Unions
have a federal structure with numerous constituent units at the local (i.e., establishment) level. Local unions lie at the heart of organized labor in
the U.S. (Freeman and Medoff 1984: 34; also see Olson 1965: 66-76). They form the organizational base of the union pyramid, and this is where
workers interact with each other on a regular basis, in the workplace and after work. At
the local level, social incentives shape to what
degree political resources of union members and their networks – votes as well as time and money – can be
effectively mobilized to influence national lawmaking. Because social incentives are more effective when groups are not too
large, this 1 logic suggests that unions’ political influence in a district is higher when union members are distributed across many local units than
when they are concentrated in few large units.1 We estimate logit models for each key vote accounting for district characteristics (the same as in
Table I) and state random effects with standard errors robust to within-state correlations.29 Figure III plots first differences in the probability of a
representative casting a vote in line with the AFL-CIO supported position together with 95% confidence intervals.30 It underscores the
substantive effect of union organization on legislative behavior. In many of the votes that matter to the AFL-CIO, a
standard deviation
increase in membership increases the probability of a representative voting the pro-union position by
almost 10 percentage points. The respective effect size for the influence of union concentration is around 5 points (all else equal). In
the case of the final passage of the Affordable Care Act, a standard deviation increase in union membership increases the probability of a
supportive vote by 11.7 (±3.7) percentage points, while an equally sized decrease in union concentration increases it by 6.5 (±2.0) points. In
contrast, voting in the far less divisive “cash for clunkers” bill (H.R. 3435, passed 316 vs. 109 in favor) is comparatively less related to union
influence: an increase in union membership increases the vote probability of a supportive vote by 4.8 (±2.5) points, while a decrease in union
concentration increases it by 4.4 (±1.9) percentage points.

Unions lobby for overregulation

Thomas, 19 (Katie Thomas, 12-3-2019, accessed on 2-1-2023, The New York Times, "Labor Unions
Team Up With Drug Makers to Defeat Drug-Price Proposals",
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/03/health/drug-prices-pelosi-unions.html)/AD
Alexander Hertel-Fernandez, an assistant professor of international and public affairs at Columbia University, said unions
that form
corporate alliances can wield considerable influence. Others said groups like Pilma can contribute to a
broader sense that taking sides on a thorny issue like drug prices carries political risks.
“Union-management coalitions have been successful in the past in pressuring Democrats to moderate
their policy agenda, especially on climate and environmental legislation,” Mr. Hertel-Fernandez said in an email. “When Democrats are
hearing from powerful corporate interests and labor interests, it’s harder for them to resist.

(Tam 16)
https://manufacturetexas.org/press/a-labor-legacy-to-remember-years-of-excessive-overregulation

The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), Texas Association of Business (TAB) and Texas Association of Manufacturers (TAM) have
released a new study that outlines the destructive legacy this
administration’s relentless labor regulatory agenda will leave
for manufacturers, their employees and the communities in which they live.
Regulations on issues such as contractor
blacklisting, employee overtime, silica, union elections and injury and illness reporting will not only result
in hundreds of millions of hours of paperwork, but will also come at a price tag of more than $80 billion
in compliance costs over the next 10 years. “This kind of financial burden hinders job growth,” said Cathy DeWitt, TAB Vice
President of Governmental Affairs. “Manufacturing is a source of good paying jobs in Texas and growing the manufacturing sector should be a
priority. These policies will not foster that growth.” “The federal government’s recent labor regulations are redundant, expensive and represent
yet another example of overreach that makes it harder for manufacturers to grow and create jobs said Tony Bennett, president and CEO of the
Texas Association of Manufacturers. “Instead of encouraging investment and economic growth, stifling regulations like these set back our efforts
to get Americans back to work.”

Businesses move out because of regulations

(Malanga 22)
https://www.city-journal.org/biden-regulatory-policies-thwarting-return-of-manufacturing-to-america

What both sides largely ignored is something that industrial companies themselves have said for years:
the Number One reason
they’ve offshored jobs is costs, and 50 years of growing regulation at the federal, state, and local levels
contributed enormously to that burden. By one count, industrial firms must adhere to some 300,000 federal
regulations alone—a bureaucratic tax of hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Local zoning and environmental
laws often short-circuit valuable industrial projects, even when they pass federal muster. The Trump
administration, to its credit, understood this, which is why it initiated a regulatory review of industrial policy and began hacking away at some of
the most arduous and outdated regs. But it didn’t get far enough in one term, and Biden already has undone much of what Trump
accomplished. Still, any cursory examination of the effects of these regulations, many decades old, suggests that the
first step in
re-industrialization—the low-hanging fruit—would be deregulatory policy that makes manufacturing in America
more competitive, including enabling firms to build new plants and staff them at reasonable costs. It’s
doubtful that the Biden administration, which somehow imagines that a green energy policy would alleviate the supply-chain crisis, will make
such an effort. But some future pro-growth president will likely make that project central to bringing back more U.S. jobs.

Jesse Hathaway, 3-9-2017, "Right-to-Work Laws Boost Workers’ Prosperity, Happiness," InsideSources,
https://insidesources.com/right-work-laws-boost-prosperity/
Research by Ohio University economics professor Richard Vedder suggests right-to-work laws can turbocharge states’ economic
growth, boosting growth rates by double-digits. In a 2014 study, Vedder modeled the economies of states with and without
right-to-work worker protections, finding, “The
overall effect of a (right-to-work) law is to increase economic
growth rates by 11.5 percentage points. (The effect) is significant at the 99 percent confidence level.”

RTW laws solve by weakening unions

Eisenbrey, Ross. “Designed To Hurt Unions and Lower Wages.” March 2015. Economic Policy Institute.
https://www.epi.org/blog/right-to-work-laws-designed-to-hurtunions-and-lower-wages/

“The fact that unions are responsible for workplace benefits, higher wages, and the right to overtime pay is the very reason Wisconsin Governor
Scott Walker, the Koch Bothers, and other corporate interests hate them. Walker hates unions so much he compared them to ISIL terrorists, so
it’s no wonder that he and Wisconsin’s Republican legislature are rushing through a “right-to-work” (RTW) bill. RTW
laws were
originally designed by business groups in the 1940s to reduce union strength and finances, and over the years
they’ve been successful. As Melanie Trotman of the Wall Street Journal pointed out to me this morning, none of the 10 states
with the highest rates of unionization are right-to-work. The Illinois Economic Policy Institute calculates that RTW
reduces union coverage by 9.6 percentage points, on average. Unsurprisingly, weakening unions leads to lower wages
and salaries for union and non-union workers alike. Heidi Shierholz and Elise Gould showed that RTW is associated with a $1,500 reduction in
annualized wages, on average, even when the analysis takes into account lower prices in those states. (On average, wages in RTW states are
nearly $6,000 less.)”

(Page 22)
https://www.nber.org/digest/202208/impacts-right-work-laws-unionization-and-wages#:~:text=Using%2
0this%20event%2Dstudy%20design,drop%20of%20about%201%20percent.

However, the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, better known as the Taft-Hartley Act, allowed states to introduce “right-to-work” laws
under which covered workers cannot be legally required to pay union dues. These
laws can create a “free-rider” problem in
union membership, undermining unions’ financing and ability to organize workers. Some states passed
right-to-work laws before 1980. Six additional states have adopted these provisions since 2001. In Right-to-Work Laws, Unionization, and Wage
Setting (NBER Working Paper 30098), Nicole Fortin, Thomas Lemieux, and Neil Lloyd find that these
laws significantly reduce
unionization rates and wages. Using this event-study design, the researchers find that right-to-work laws are
associated with a drop of about 4 percentage points in unionization rates five years after adoption, as well
as a wage drop of about 1 percent. These impacts are almost entirely driven by three industries with high unionization rates at
baseline — construction, education, and public administration — where right-to-work laws reduce unionization by almost 13
percentage points and wages by more than 4 percent, again over five years. The impact of right-to-work laws on wages and
unionization rates is also larger for women and public-sector workers, two groups that are overrepresented in highly unionized
industries.

Impact of manufacturing

Devon Bistarkey, 10-14-2022, "U.S. Manufacturing Ecosystem Key to Economic Growth, Innovation,
Competitiveness," U.S. Department of Defense,
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3189049/us-manufacturing-ecosystem-key
-to-economic-growth-innovation-competitiveness/

"America’smanufacturing ecosystem has been a vital engine of economic growth, innovation, and
competitiveness for over 200 years — and has played a critical role in developing and driving the technologies
that sustain our national security," said Bill LaPlante, undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, during an address celebrating
October as Manufacturing Month. "Today, the U.S. is in a technological and economic race to maintain its manufacturing edge, particularly as it
concerns critical defense systems, such as satellites, advanced munitions and communications technologies." "As
an engine of
economic growth, American manufacturers contribute more than $2.35 trillion to the U.S. economy — every dollar spent in
manufacturing results in an additional $2.79 added to the economy, making it the highest multiplier effect of any
sector," said LaPlante.

Impact of job loss

Ariel Gelrud Shiro and Kristin Butcher, 7-21-2022, "The long-term economic scars of job displacements,"
Brookings,
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2022/07/21/the-long-term-economic-scars-of-job-displacem
ents/

Figure 1 shows the effects of a job displacement on log annual earnings for each year relative to the displacement. There are several key takeaways from the figure.
First, there is a large initial negative effect of a displacement on earnings. We estimate a 57 percent decline in annual earnings in the
year immediately following displacement, which is in line with earlier displacement studies. Second, although earnings rebound to some extent
in subsequent years, the negative effect lingers. Even ten years after a displacement, workers earn about 25 percent less

compared to their non-displaced peers.[1] Simply put, Figure 1 has a stark message: workers who experience a job displacement suffer
immediate and large earnings losses, which persist even a decade later. Immediately after a displacement, hourly wages decline by almost 15 percent and they never
fully recover. Ten years after a displacement, workers still experience a nearly 15 percent decrease in hourly wages relative to their non-displaced peers. This suggests
that the lingering effect of a job displacement on annual earnings is driven by a decline in wages and not by a decline in the likelihood of being employed or in hours
worked. To understand the mechanism behind the lasting negative earnings effect of displacements, we look at the impact of displacements on hourly wages and
annual hours worked. While we find that workers
work significantly fewer hours in the first couple of years following a
job displacement, the longer-term impact is driven by a decline in hourly wages. Figure 2 plots the effect of a job
displacement on log hourly wages by relative year

(Citibeats 22)
https://www.citibeats.com/center-for-knowledge/the-relationship-between-poverty-and-unemployment

In fact, unemployment rate, median wages, and wage inequality are all significant determinants of poverty, according to research from American
nonprofit organization the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). A 1% increase in unemployment yields a 0.4 to
0.7% increase in poverty rates, and a 10% increase in minimum wage yields a 2% decrease in poverty rates, it states.

(Cohut 20) https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/327440

For many people who consider suicide, the

common point is a pervading feeling of hopelessness, often as a result of
facing problems from which they can see no way out. One of these problems is, perhaps unsurprisingly, experiencing
financial difficulties. Following on from these findings, the researchers went on to estimate that in the 6 years after the great recession of 2009
— in which unemployment rates were at a historic high — as
many as 13,800 suicides could have been prevented among
people with a high-school or lower degree of formal education if only the state minimum wage had increased
by $1.
LeDuc (UNEMPLOYMENT REDUCES LIFE EXPECTANCY…)
https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/unemployment-reduces-life-expectancy

Accurate unemployment statistics are not easy to find for some countries in the world, but the principles are the same no matter where you live....when a large
One estimate based upon historical data found
number of people cannot find work they lose more than money. Many lose their lives.

that during prolonged economic downturns each 1% increase in unemployment results in 37,000
deaths...making having no job the most dangerous job of all
C2
Sherk ‘11 (Right to Work Increases Jobs and Choices; Nov 9, 2011)
https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/right-work-increases-jobs-and-choices/#_ftn6

Right-to-work states are much more attractive for businesses investment. Unionized firms earn lower profits,
invest less, and create fewer jobs than comparable nonunion firms.
Sherk ‘11 (Right to Work Increases Jobs and Choices; Nov 9, 2011)
https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/right-work-increases-jobs-and-choices/#_ftn6

Right-to-work laws reduce the financial benefit from organizing workplaces where unions have limited
support. This makes unions less aggressive and encourages business investment, creating jobs. States
can and should reduce unemployment by becoming right-to-work states.
Sherk ‘11 (Right to Work Increases Jobs and Choices; Nov 9, 2011)
https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/right-work-increases-jobs-and-choices/#_ftn6

Boeing’s decision to build a new plant in South Carolina—a right-to-work state—illustrates a larger
trend. Businesses consider[ed] the presence (or absence) of a right-to-work law a major factor when
deciding where to locate.[7] It was no accident that foreign automobile brands located their U.S. plants primarily
in right-to-work states like Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee.
Wilkinson et al. 22 (Right-to-Work battle looms in Michigan: Businesses
fear repeal by Democrats; Dec 2, 2022)
https://www.bridgedetroit.com/right-to-work-battle-looms-in-michigan-businesses-fear-repeal-by-demo
crats/

“Obviously, labor has been (and) is a part of the fabric of the state of Michigan,” he said. “Our workers
here should be supported and treated with dignity as well in the work that they do.”
Right-to-Work, which was approved by Republicans in 2012, allows workers to opt out of paying dues in
union-represented jobs but still receive benefits.
Business leaders question why the law’s repeal should be a priority after a year-long bipartisan push to
attract investment and jobs, including a $5 billion investment by the state to create a fund to attract
big-ticket projects.
Gray (The Innovation Race: Why It's More Important Than Ever for
Public & Private Sectors to Invest in Basic R&D)
https://www.gray.com/insights/the-innovation-race-why-its-more-important-than-ever-for-public-privat
e-sectors-to-invest-in-basic-rd/

To keep pace with today’s advancing technologies and remain competitive, international and domestic
manufacturers are investing heavily in R&D spending. This is particularly true for automotive and
technology key players like Volkswagen (VW) and Samsung.
Nguyen and Qiu ‘22 (Right-to-Work laws and corporate innovation; Oct
2022)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0929119922001067#:~:text=(2021)%20show%2
0that%20stock%20market,an%20increase%20in%20innovation%20outputs.

RTW enactment allows treated firms to

We add to this literature by showing that the reduction in financial distress risk because of the

conduct innovation activities more freely, leading to an increase in innovation outputs.

Bornet ‘21 (Saving Millions Of Lives Per Year With Intelligent
Automation; May 13, 2021)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/05/13/saving-millions-of-lives-per-year-with-intel
ligent-automation/?sh=4fed28071349

Overall, based on my research and expertise, I believe IA

technologies could reduce early deaths by 10–30%. Back in 2017,
a 20% reduction in the 56 million total annual deaths worldwide would have meant saving 14 million
lives every year — the equivalent of the populations of Switzerland and Singapore.
Oppenheimer Funds ‘16 (Investing in Innovation)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/brand-connect/oppenheimerfunds/investing-in-innovation/

The United Nations and the World Bank have reported that global poverty has been cut in half over
the past 20 years, thanks largely to the impact of technology on productivity.