When they named the policy "Right-to-Work", they really hit upon a lovable brand -- after all, who doesn't love the right to work? -- and we have not been able to come up with a comparable rebranding that is just as simple, just as instinctive, but more accurately describes the truth of the policy... until now.

I find that calling the policy "RIGHT-TO-MOOCH" rather than "Right-to-Work" really gets deep, deep, deep under the skin of my conservative friends -- the idea being that they don't want to see themselves as moochers who freely "steal the gains" from the courageous organizing efforts of others without at least paying for those hard-fought, union-won gains.

They know deep down inside that when they say they want Right-to-Work laws, what they REALLY mean is that they want all the benefits of joining a union without having to pay for it -- and best of all, they know it instinctively, and they hate it. NOBODY wants to be a moocher, especially right-wingers, but they know that's exactly what they're advocating when they clamor for the Right-to-Work.

"RIGHT-TO-MOOCH" is simple. It's emotionally disturbing. It's accurate. And even right-wingers know immediately what is meant by it without having to have it explained to them.

If you can think of a better name for it, I'm all ears, but I have yet to hear of a better rebranding of "RIGHT-TO-WORK" than "RIGHT-TO-MOOCH".

Originally posted to Jimdotz on Thu Dec 13, 2012 at 10:43 AM PST.

Also republished by In Support of Labor and Unions.


Have you heard of a better name for it than "Right-to-Mooch"?

4%24 votes
89%511 votes
5%32 votes

| 568 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.