Report Reveals Flaws in Union Studies
Labor advocates often refer to recent union “studies” as support for labor law reform. These, as it turns out, “lack sufficient credibility and analytical vigor” to support their conclusions. This revelation is made in a newly-released White Paper, Responding to Union Rhetoric: The Reality of the American Workplace, published by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The Chamber notes the following:
1. The pro-union “studies” are sponsored by biased organizations, like American Rights At Work, which received $2.3 million from the AFL-CIO and its affiliates in 2008;
2. The pro-union authors of the “studies” receive money directly from unions, such as one who was paid $62,472 from the SEIU in 2005;
3. The source of the “facts” used are almost exclusively from union organizations not exactly known for objectivity;
4. The use of NLRB statistics by the proponents often are based on accusations and not findings established after evidentiary after hearings or trials;
5. The “studies” ignore other, more credible, sources of objective information, such as Zogby and Rasmussen polls.
For those truly interested in a factual basis to support or not support labor law changes, the Chamber’s White Paper is indispensible.
