The New Hampshire House passed right-to-work legislation today by a 198-139 vote.
Republicans, led by Speaker William O'Brien, said the bill would make the state more attractive to businesses.
Democrats called the bill unnecessary. House Minority Leader Terie Norelli, D-Portsmouth, noted the vote would not withstand a sure veto by Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat in his last year of office.
"Waste of time to revisit issues that already failed – but why work on real issues?" Norelli Tweeted after the vote.
Mark MacKenzie, president of the New Hampshire AFL-CIO, said the vote sends a message to the Senate and to the governor that there are enough votes to sustain a veto.
"The polling that we've done–people are tired of this issue, they think we should put it behind us and they think we should move on to things that are really important, which are job creation and building the New Hampshire economy and this is not the way you build the New Hampshire economy."
House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt, R-Salem, said the bill is about creating jobs.
"This Legislature has been tasked with creating jobs," he tells Patch in the attached video, "so we're looking at every possible piece of legislation that's going to help us create jobs."
Speaker O'Brien released the following statement after the vote:
"Last year, we had a thorough discussion about making New Hampshire a Right to Work state. Unfortunately the Governor chose to go against the will of the 63 percent majority of House members who passed this bill and the nearly 80 percent of Granite Staters who oppose forced unionism. The opponents said that passing Right to Work would not result in companies moving to New Hampshire. The experience of Indiana, which just became the nation’s 23rd Right to Work state, proved that opponents place their union prerogatives in opposition to jobs for neighbors.
“Recently, Indiana passed Right to Work. The ink on the new law had not even dried when we learned that Caterpillar, one of the nation’s largest manufacturing firms, would immediate relocate a plant from Canada to Indiana, specifically because it was a Right to Work state. This means over 450 new, high-paying jobs for Indiana’s workers, as well as hundreds of additional spin off jobs from the presence of the plant.
“There is no reason why New Hampshire shouldn’t have the opportunity to attract companies such as Caterpillar, Boeing and Audi, businesses that locate to Right to Work states. Watching opportunities for good, new jobs and economic growth pass us by is against our state’s traditions and weakens the New Hampshire Advantage. We need to get the Granite State back in the game of being competitive and helping our citizens."
Critics of the bill noted the strength of New Hampshire's economy, compared to neighboring states' unemployment rates.
Rep. Kenneth Gidge, D-Nashua, after the vote, said, "Can it get any dumber than this? Isn't New Hampshire doing well? We're the envy of the country."
Edward Dunsel
12:48 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Women? Dont vote Republican? OK, Speaker Bill will take away your insurance coverage.
Students? Dont vote Republican? OK, Speaker Bill will take away your right to vote.
Unions? Dont vote Republican? OK, Speaker Bill will take away your negotiating rights.
This isn't legislation. Its simply the Speaker's Revenge List.
Peter North
7:10 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Exactly true. I am thinking that some Republican Reps will start distancing themselves from the Speaker now that their jobs maybe in danger. Check out the results from other communities. A certain State Rep is no longer a Selectman in Hudson, and most of the tea party candidates were crushed !
LJoel Hackbart
1:59 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Here we go again. The republicans all out war on workers and decent wages
and benefits remains relentless.The right to work for less bill repackaged
and crammed down workers throats yet again.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzVKVcmhZ5M
Russ Richardson
2:00 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
This is a shameful day for New Hampshire.
Right to Work legislation is an attack on the system of negotiation and an assault on the democratic principals which gives workers rights to discuss work related and compensation issues with their employers.
This Bill has everything to to do with killing workers rights and is just another spear in the heart of American democracy.
salem activist
6:18 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Four Salem Representatives voted YES! Representative Bettencourt did not vote and was not excused, but we has stated he was in favor of this and Representative Elliott did not vote but was excused but his voice has demonstrated his disapproval of the salaries our union Police, Fire and Teachers make! ...Let's remember this in November!!!
Peter North
7:08 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Rep Elliott is on the beach in Florida which speaks volumes of his dedication to his position in the house. He needs to go in November ! And does anyone recall that Rep Elliott was once the Chaplin for the Salem Fire Dept ?
This will all be vetoed by the Governor and it will never survive an over ride vote. The best thing the Senate could do is not accept this bill.
salem resident
8:57 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Are you all dumb as heck? No, you're actually just trying to protect your jobs and benefits, that --guess what-- wouldn't be affected one dollar by Right to Work legislation. The most Right to Work would affect you is that some unemployed person you know would suddenly have a job provided by a major company like Boeing. A company who currently is NOT motivated to moving to NH, no matter how much you believed the words Democrat Minority Leader Spaghetti Norelli fed you. Why do you agree with NH staying second-best like the AFL-CIO president wants it to stay? Don't be dumb sheep, please. Don't be dumb sheep.
LJoel Hackbart
1:55 am on Thursday, March 15, 2012
Maybe we don't want to be another wage depressed right to work for less state.
THAT would be dumb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
www.epi.org/publication/datazone_rtw_index
www.frequency.com/video/right-to-work-for-less/35475874
Rick
11:25 pm on Wednesday, March 14, 2012
The infamous Speaker O'Brien took time out from his "guns, gays and abortion" agenda to go after labor again. The Governor has his veto pen already to go....
NH Labor News
8:13 am on Thursday, March 15, 2012
LJOEL I could not agree more. Here is our recent post on the Patch, local voices about the events of yesterday. http://nashua.patch.com/blog_posts/speaker-of-the-house-takes-another-swing-at-right-to-work
Dennis Taylor
6:08 pm on Friday, March 16, 2012
How about limitations on the salaries of executives and owners in exchange for the destruction of collective bargaining? What if the highest paid persons in a company could only make seven times what the lowest make? This would give an incentive to persons at all levels to improve so as to make more money available for all. Otherwise, workers, who have a great number of disavantages, need to be able to bargain collectively with management. I would, however, be in favor of compensation for workers that is tied to gross profits for the company as opposed to wages and benefits.
LJoel Hackbart
2:32 am on Saturday, March 17, 2012
"How about limitations on the salaries of executives and owners in exchange for the destruction of collective bargaining?" That is an oxymoron since this arangement
is a form of collective bargaining! But these co-ops have been used in workplaces
before successfuly. I don't know how you could ever get this going on a grand scale,
but I like the thought.
[Basic employee pay is necessary regardless of the financial health of the company.]