Indiana 'Right To Work' Measure Criticized By Illinois Governor Pat Quinn

As Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels prepares to sign right-to-work legislation into law, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn said he's not worried about the move driving companies out of Illinois and to Indiana.

Before Quinn presented his State of the State address Wednesday, he told CBS Chicago that most Illinois businesses are happy with union labor, and that prohibiting unions from requiring representation fees is a bad policy.

“That ain’t gonna happen, I’ll tell you that," Quinn said, when asked by CBS whether businesses will leave Illinois for Indiana. "I think that’s a bad bill and I’m very sorry that Mitch Daniels is gonna sign the ‘right to work for less’ bill. That’s a bad bill for the incomes of hard-working people."

Indiana lawmakers voted Wednesday to make Indiana the Rust Belt's first right-to-work state, the Associated Press reports.

Hundreds of union members gathered inside the Statehouse chanted "Shame on you!" and "See you at the Super Bowl!" as the vote was announced. Thousands more amassed outside for a rally that was expected to spill into the Indianapolis streets, already bustling with Super Bowl festivities, hoping to point a national spotlight on the state.

Indiana will be the first state in a decade to enact a right-to-work law, although few states with legislation in place boast Indiana's union clout, borne of a long manufacturing legacy. The move is likely to embolden national right-to-work advocates who have unsuccessfully pushed the measure in other states following a Republican sweep of statehouses in 2010.

“Having a good union work force like Caterpillar and John Deere and Ford and Mitsubishi and Chrysler; they all have – Navistar as well – they’re all organized by the UAW and the UAW believes in making sure that people get a decent wage, get a decent health care plan and a decent retirement,” Quinn told CBS.

This is not the first time Quinn, a Democrat, has butted heads with Republican Gov. Daniels.

When Quinn passed the state's tax hike last year, Daniels said businesses that choose to stay in the state are "suckers."

"It's like living next door to `The Simpsons' – you know, the dysfunctional family down the block," Daniels said at the time.

Quinn has also criticized Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, saying that the Republican governor "should be ashamed of himself" for taking collective bargaining rights away from public workers.

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[Faust Eddie]

11:36 AM on 02/04/2012

Latest Fortune magazine has article about ALABAMA, a right to work state, that is attracting all kinds of Auto and Aerospcae jobs, medical industry jobs, has the best worker training programs in the country, low taxes, etc. Which is exactly opposite of this poor state of Illinois.

Illinois likes to use people's houises as piggy banks more and more latley. I have no problem with the public schools that i pay for with thesetaxes . My kids go there. I have a big problem with double dippers, ghost payrollers, buying fleet vehicles with people's taxes, bloated pensions, etc.. etc.....

[cored]

05:34 PM on 02/03/2012

I don't really get this. Perhaps if I'd experienced a really good union, I'd look at it differently. I mean, certainly unions were necessary and did a great deal of good for worker's rights as the US industrialized, but now all they seem to do is suck.
The unions were part of the reason automobile companies couldn't compete. The unions got ridiculous, unsustainable benefits, which is exactly what I've seen on a smaller scale with the union I worked with a few jobs ago.
I was working on staffing software that would streamline the process of filling in shifts while taking into account all of the union rules for workers. A single glance at those rules told they were often counterproductive, and sometimes even at cross-purposes. The union seemed to demand things of the management with the idea of simply getting as much as they could possibly get, without worrying about if it would adversely impact profitability, or even if it made sense for them and actually improved their working environment. It seemed pretty crazy.
Granted, that's only one union I've had personal experience with, but I've heard very similar things from others. And I know that there are some pretty crappy things that companies do to people who work in my industry, that perhaps a union might help with, but I would be pretty annoyed if I was forced to pay dues to people who were actually making the situation worse.

[aircraft]

11:44 AM on 02/03/2012

Knowing that the Gov of Ill is a democrat why would he want to upset the Unions. He has probably received a lot of " forced dues " money from the Unions and does not want to lose it. His statement of making less is less then truthfull as is all denouncements of giving the worker the "right" to choose whether they want to belong to a Union or not. Right to Work legislation is not about being "anti-union",but rather about giving a worker a right to choose. If a particular Union is so good then they will have no difficulty remaining. Can't wait to see the number of busineeses that will rethink about staying in Illinois.

[Orvell Cline]

12:42 AM on 02/03/2012

The dues are what pay the on going education programs, and operation cost. Very little, fractions of a penny on the dollar go to any political fund. It would be like some one moving into your house with out your permission and eating your food, using your electric, water and not paying a cent. Now does that not sound like stealing or socialisism? That is exactly what right to work allows. Can you pay for people to do that? Neither can a union. people who work very hard and break their bodies down to ensure you have utilities provided to you and schools, bridges and highways are a little upset about it. These men work hard, they are skilled, most with college educations. I have two degrees and am going for my third soon, then advanced degrees. I am a common worker not a boss. I think men who work so hard, many with wives that work should be able to afford a place to live and health care for their children. Some work in the sun at dizzying heights and the snow and cold, others work in an office enclosed in walls under the humm of fluorescent lights. All jobs take skill and intellect if done well. I have known teachers and engineers who joined the carpenters because they wanted to. Many ex military men find the camaraderie and test of the physical self in unions that they experienced in the military and like it, it is like home.

[aircraft]

12:21 PM on 02/03/2012

As a retired teacher (1973 to 2006), former serviceman(1965-1968) and village trustee you coudn't be more wrong. The dues go for the union bosses and for political contributions to mostly democrats. Forced dues is extracted and without consent from the individual spent on political activity that is only in the interest of the Union. Your analogy of moving into the "house" is more in line with the Unions taking over your house without permission. Your first degree should have been to think for yourself. When as a teacher (Wisconsin) I chose to be a "fair share member", but was told by the Union that rather then a "proportionate amount of dues as certified by the Union" ( Wisconsin Fair Share Law ) being extracted from my paycheck, they were going to deduct FULL dues and treat me as a Non-member! Not exactly the fairness I was expecting. They (Union) also tried to have me fired so as to keep a member. Thank goodness the school district supported me.

[buckydumpster]

09:44 PM on 02/02/2012

"Right To Work"

This term...phrase, description..was not conceived by someone who works for a living.

[akutan]

07:30 PM on 02/02/2012

Are unions going to occupy the Super Bowl?

[akutan]

07:20 PM on 02/02/2012

I am getting out of the APWU. Over $600 bucks extra for my retirement account a year.

[akutan]

07:16 PM on 02/02/2012

Why should one be forced to pay dues if they don't want to?

[demsrsilly]

07:26 AM on 02/03/2012

The left is very much anti- choice on this matter.

Forced union dues = more money for the union bosses = more money for the dem party.

The left nor the unions care about the actual worker, just their money.

[PalinEffect]

07:04 PM on 02/02/2012

Why is that puke Daniels on the embedded video and not Quinn? Illinois's state tax could have been doubled by Pat Quinn and still would be less than Indiana's. Illinois's state tax was 1/3rd of Wisconsin's and now is still well below Wisconsin's.

Wisconsin- adding no private jobs and losing many public worker jobs. Illinois - 1800 needed for a new third shift at Chrysler.

[corwin]

07:40 PM on 02/02/2012

Diffidently, I have to ask you if you believe the tax burden in toto is higher for Indiana or illinois residents ?

[PalinEffect]

11:24 PM on 02/02/2012

Indiana still has higher personal taxes and business taxes. Illinois is indeed handing out many millions in tax breaks to businesses. Motorola extorted $100 Milllion.

ILLINOIS will be busy building new rail - HSR Chicago to St. Louis and Chicago to Quad Cities. Over too many years, though.

[Orvell Cline]

01:31 AM on 02/03/2012

Median income in IL 44.87k IN 39.2k a difference of 13-14%. IL residents could afford more taxes. Unemployment with in 1%(I think with out double checking). More states with right to work have higher poverty levels and thus receive more from the federal government then states with out right to work. Those are facts you can look up Corwin, the first two go to dept of labor website.

[slinkybro]

01:32 PM on 02/02/2012

Are we sure Quinn isn't getting paid by Indiana to encourage compaines to relocate to the state with the better buisness environment.

[Spiral Architect]

12:55 PM on 02/02/2012

Go Indiana!! Illinois is just bitter b/c now they will lose even more footing than they already have lost.

Choice has won.

[MrStat1]

12:27 PM on 02/02/2012

If the people of Illinois don't want this, fine. If the people of Indiana want this, fine. This is not news.

[holymosy]

01:34 PM on 02/02/2012

How do you know what the people of Indiana want? The people had no say! It was approved by a few handful of dictators! When something like this involves a whole state and it has been that way for years, a few dictators should not be able to change the laws without allowing the people to vote for on it. That is what is partly wrong with this country! A few people get together and decide what is best for this country and look what a mess they have made in this country!
Indiana, it should be your choice! Not the dictators!

[MrStat1]

01:59 PM on 02/02/2012

Because the voters "voted" in those they wanted to represent them and they passed the law. Therefore, it does represent the majority of the voters views. If not, they can vote them out the next election.

[corwin]

07:41 PM on 02/02/2012

Um,because the Republicans had large majorities in both Houses.And,a Republican governor. (Sorry to bring logic into it.)

[Greg34]

12:22 PM on 02/02/2012

The UAW banktupted the auto industry and needed taxpayer money to keep the companies afloat. While I am all for a living wage for people there are some position that are not worth a living wage and the unions need to accept that.

[redraspberry]

01:07 PM on 02/02/2012

The UAW did not get anything that wasn't given to them. Management with no backbone will always fail.

[buckydumpster]

10:05 PM on 02/02/2012

That's a pretty bold statement. Do you have proof? Could it have been that the shrinking middleclass could no longer afford the SUV's the industry was shoving at us when gasoline hit 4 dollars a gallon?

[janesvillekidd]

11:35 AM on 02/02/2012

I didn't know I. wasn't a right to work state anymore. I left in 90 and it still was?

[suzee q]

11:33 AM on 02/02/2012

I don't normally agree with Quinn ever, but on this we agree. There's a first time for everything.