I’ve never understood the idea that unions have “outlived” their usefulness. Most of the people that are claiming this are forced to acknowledge that their were abuses against workers before unions were allowed. And these abuses no longer exist. So how does it follow that unions are no longer needed?
To make an analogy that a conservative would understand, suppose we had a state with a stagnant economy. I’m the governor and I propose that we revitalize our economy by decreasing taxes by 50%. The voodoo works and our economy thrives. Should I then turn around and say that now that our economy is strong, the tax cuts have outlived their usefulness and we can raise taxes back up to their old level?
The argument against unions is deeply ingrained in the youth of today. They have not seen a pro union article in print in their lifetimes. Newspapers busted their unions many years ago. You get nothing positive ion the tube either.
Unions fought for vacations, overtime pay , 40 hr week, health care etc. When the deed is done ,they will be eliminated. Unions fought for a safe work place too. All this will be ground away like the pension plans and health care.
For what it’s worth, I see pro-union newspaper articles all over the place. And the weird thing is, I’m in the same state as you and probably see the same papers.
Much of the disdain for unions – among those people that disdain them – have more to do with absurd union contract clauses and perceived ineffeciencies in them, as well as the forced, compulsory participation in unions in those states that are not right-to-work states (such a Michigan). Back when unions did all of the good stuff that you mention, they weren’t “social organizations” promoting all kinds of silly stuff like they do now.
The thing is, good unions aren’t irrelevant; there just aren’t any “good” unions (as I define them). Offer people things that they want, and they’ll probably buy in. But have you looked at a normal union contract? It’s full of so much crap that has no relevance in a modern, dynamic workplace. Companies are trying to modernize, and if unions want to survive, they’ll have to modernize, too.
Generally the figures quoted are the costs of the emloyee. to the company The workers make nothing like those numbers. The automation in the last couple decades erased many thousands of workers from the payroll. The cost of labor therefore has diminished in it’s effect on the price of an automobile.
The larger issue that the unions actually had a big part in solving (worker safety) has generally remained solved with the decline of the unions. With the worker’s compensation system, safe workplace rules for most industrial companies are now good business, the incentive to maintain worker safety does not need (in general) the influence of a union.
If unions ceased to exist, however, I firmly believe that many employers would cease to take things such as worker safety and other rights and benefits seriously.
In other words, GM’s pension fund for workers is actually overfunded. And…
“GM has often said its U.S. pension plans added about $800 to the cost of each car made in the U.S. in 2004.” In truth its pension plan for workers adds about $200 of extra income per car to GM’s bottom line.
Unions were necessary when there were monopsonies. A monopsony is a monopoly which buys instead of selling (ie it buys labor). A monopsony, like a monopoly, holds huge power to get things its way without caring for what is fair. The single factory in a town can screw over its workers any way it wants.
Unions, being monopolies, were a solution to fighting monopsonies. These days, however, there exist far fewer monopsonies than there used to be. In given industries there is more competition, and there is also more competition between industries. There’s a wide array of factors which have increased competition and have prevented companies from growing large and abusive.
A union which has no power to oppose becomes as tretcherous and detrimental to society as a monopsony with an ununionized workforce. It becomes a clique which drums up wages for itself by preventing other workers from entering the trade. Most directly, this also hurts consumers (besides workers). However, more important is that monopolies increase inflation (because of their power to demand more money), making it necessary for the Federal Reserve to take fiscal measures which end up reducing employment and GDP across the entire of economy. Monopolies in the form of corporations do this, and monopolies in the form of unions do this equally well.
I praise the oncoming age, free of monopolies and monopsonies. But if this age is to arrive, unions must go as well (else they be the powerful evil). This is why unions have outlived their usefulness and now do more harm than good.
“Offset” doesn’t mean completely overpower and eliminate. The math must be $800 lost - $200 gained = $600 lost.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051126/BUSINESS01/511260313/1014 This is another article showing where the numbers are derived. The pay rate is nothing like this post suggests.Read recently when GM shut a plant in the US they were simultaneously building one in China. Cars will still be made but not here. The danger is that when the automobile industry was created ,it also developed a middle class with it. That is going fast. These people supported bars ,restaurants, intertainment venues. etc. They were able to buy the vehicles they made. They wont any longer .Neither will the Chinese workers, who will be paid poorly.Short term fix for profit ,long term problems.
Before I retired in 2003, a union benefits officer told me that the average auto worker dies less than 5 years after retiring. So you see, we are doing our part to save General Motors, by dying.