CONCORD – The fight over right to work returned to a packed chamber in the New Hampshire House of Representatives Thursday.

There were the Republican rank-and-file lawmakers, echoed by some political heavyweight supporters, predicting that making New Hampshire the 24th right-to-work state would strike a blow for employee freedom and ignite new job growth.

Then there were the more than 300 public union employees declaring this campaign to be nothing more than a national tea party narrative to strip the working class of basic labor rights.

Despite the big numbers, passion on both sides was noticeably muted. This may be because that while the pivotal votes are perhaps months away, the outcome is already known.

Unless there are a lot of turncoat legislators – highly unlikely since fierce lobbying took place on both sides for eight months in 2011 – the Republican-dominated Legislature will pass this bill, HB 1677.

Like last November, Democratic Gov. John Lynch will veto the bill and the move to override that decision in the House will come up short. What is new is that right to work has already emerged as a touchstone issue in the upcoming race for governor.

Two declared Republican candidates – Ovide Lamontagne of Manchester and Kevin Smith of Litchfield – both steeled themselves against the heavy union crowd to embrace the idea.

“New Hampshire can do better than it has done historically for people to come to the workplace and be free from having to join a union or pay dues,” Lamontagne said. “This is not taking away collective bargaining right as has been said in the press; this is about employee rights.”

Smith agreed adopting this law would not be a “silver bullet” to bring new jobs but would be a good marketing tool along with the lack of a broad-based sales or income tax.

“It would significantly enhance our competitive advantage,” Smith said.

“Do I believe that right to work is anti-union? No I do not. “If you choose to join the union, fine, but you should not be able to partake in the union-negotiated benefits or representation either.”

This edition of the Employee Freedom of Choice Act would prevent a public employee union from negotiating a contract that required workers either to pay union dues or a so-called “fair share” payment to cover the costs of collective bargaining.

David Lang, president of the Professional Association of Fire Fighters, stressed no public employee is forced to join a union and public employers can block any attempt to compel worker to pay fair share fees.

“It is bad for New Hampshire; it is bad for the employees. This is not the way New Hampshire very proudly legislates,” Lang said. “Common sense always prevails particularly in the peoples’ House. Look at the polls. New Hampshire is not for this. There is no clamor to do this.”

Mark MacKenzie, president of the NH AFL-CIO Union, said labor-sponsored studies have concluded wages would drop if New Hampshire adopted this law, something the sponsors strongly dispute.

“With all this evidence it would seem that those advocating in favor of this bill are actually driven by ideological belief system with no real regard for the true impact this bill will have on New Hampshire’s middle class working families and our states’ economic future,” MacKenzie said.

House Speaker William O’Brien, R-Mont Vernon, noted that since Indiana became the latest right-to-work state 2 weeks ago, Caterpillar announced it was moving a union shop plant in Ontario to Muncie, Idaho.

“First, we know that the argument that right to work won’t create jobs is 100 percent fiction,” O’Brien said. “The evidence is staring us directly in the face and could not be clearer.”

O’Brien said Lynch bears responsibility for blocking the bill from becoming law.

“Our governor’s lack of commitment to job creation means that more of the 38,000 friends and neighbors who are unemployed will continue to have to look for work instead of having good jobs,” O’Brien said. “It is time for that to change and every day we delay risks another company bringing hundreds of jobs to another right to work state and not to New Hampshire.”

The House last November voted 240-139 to override Lynch’s veto which was 13 votes short of reaching the two-thirds benchmark.

Rep. Mary Gorman, D-Nashua, said the Legislature has spoken and those supporting this issue should first face the votes this fall before trying to push this onto the state’s books.

Kevin Landrigan can reached at 321-7040 or klandrigan@nashuatelegraph.com; also check out Kevin Landrigan (@KLandrigan) on Twitter and don’t forget The Telegraph’s new, interactive live feed at www.nashuatelegraph.com/topics/livefeed.

Comments