Trade unions are groups of workers who have banded together to engage, through their union leaders, in collective bargaining. Historically unions have been called ‘communist’ and ‘socialist’. (‘Workers of the world, unite!’) The union members work together for the collective good. Yet many union workers claim that socialism is anathema to The American Way.
Question 1: Are trade unions indeed a form of socialism?
Question 2: If the answer to Question 1 is yes, why is union socialism (higher wages, reasonable working hours, health coverage, pension) ‘good’ and socialism in the form of government programs (education grants, health care) ‘bad’?
It’s workers trying to make more money and get more stuff for themselves. They are concerned with their betterment, not anybody external to their union. That’s very capitalistic.
But they’re ‘paying taxes’ (union dues) for the good of the collective. What’s good for the collective is good for the individual. Wouldn’t Capitalism be more like investing in the company and reaping the fruits of their investments?
Here in the US, socialism is present in the form of trade unions, social programs, government subsidies (like farm subsidies) and so on. The US is not a pure capitalist country, just like China is not purely socialist country - rather they are blends of different bits and pieces that have a general leaning in one direction or another.
There are differant unions with differant values, but all work toward the interst of their members.
The definitio of what is best for members can vary depending upon circumstances, I have known unions agree staffing losses - actually most unions will and will negotiate terms.
I have seen unions actually set out pay reductions in order to keep a business afloat.
The Airline Pilots Association is known for being quite right wing.
You cannot really collectives all unions in this way, some unions belong to pan-union associations, others do not.
I wouldn’t say Unions are more socialist than Special Interest lobbyists are. They are working for the betterment of themselves, a select group among a wide pool. However, when there’s a Union for Unions (like the Norwegian LO) you might be talking . . .
The premise of question 2 is wrong. Trade unions are not “good” especially now. They have grown so much they are now counter productive. They are a big business themselves with their own interests. When bargaining for the body they are more concerned with how much they (the union) will benefit, not as much concerned for the worker. On the other half of the question. Welfare is not necessarily “bad” for people that are truly incapable of functioning in our society it is good. For people that defraud and scam taxpayers money it is bad. Unfortuneately, the percentage of scammers has increased over the years.
Collective bargaining in itself is not socialist at all (very capitalist, in fact.) Unions become socialist when they start to agitate for changes in the law that gives them an unfair or monopolistic advantage in the market. Closed shop laws and “hiring halls” are a prime example of authoritarian economic regulation – and like most such interference leads inevitably to great shittiness. It’s also a blatant double standard; no liberal democracy would ever permit such artificially high barriers to entry in any market – except if your market is labor.
Are you listening to yourself? This seems to me to be the very definition of capitalist! Their capital is their labor and they’re using their investors capital to bargain the best return. I fail to see how this is socialist. They would be socialist if they, the workers, owned the means of production
fj1200: I just want to say I like your username. (R1 rider here.)
Here’s what prompted the question: Many union workers are dead-set against social programs such as UHC. I’ve never worked in a union, so much of my knowledge of them comes from high school history classes that focused on the disputes in the 1930s. Back then Big Business saw them as Communists.
Question 1: Are trade unions indeed a form of socialism?
No. They are voluntary associations, no more socialist that, say, the Rotary Club. Though there were socialist/communist unions, current trade unions are not interested in government control of industry. They will ask for the government to pass laws in their interest, but so does every corporation in the US.
Question 2: If the answer to Question 1 is yes, why is union socialism (higher wages, reasonable working hours, health coverage, pension) ‘good’ and socialism in the form of government programs (education grants, health care) ‘bad’?
Neither is bad. And neither one is, strictly speaking, socialism, where the government directly controls important industries. Indeed, something like the current Medicaid Drug plan was pushed by corporations as a way for them to reduce their medical insurance costs for retirees, so obviously it had a strong profit motive in its establishment.
Classic American unionism was founded on the principle that the workers should have more control over their jobs, not that the entire company should be controlled or owned by the government. Even today, a company’s biggest ally in fighting a hostile takeover is often the union pension fund that owns a big chunk of company stock.
There are still remnants of that in today’s unions. In the skilled trades, it’s the union that administers the master/journeyman/apprentice programs and provides the training. Concepts like a fixed-length workday and workweek with paid overtime, and “jurisdiction” (Teamsters haul lights, and electricians hook them up) were also an attempt by unions to establish control over work rules.
As for union opposition to universal health care, that’s simple. Health care is a staple of union/company bargaining. Neither side wants to give up the benefit they’ve negotiated to a third party that may not come up with as good a program.
(R1 rider here.)