# The Decline of Unions is your Problem too **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 4, 2013, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319 "2013-02-04T17:01:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/41 "2013-02-04T20:50:54Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > Not so good for consumers who have to pay higher prices. But those consumers are wealthier because they have union jobs that pay higher wages. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/42 "2013-02-04T20:54:26Z")
> [@XT](#): > > WHY is productivity going up (while union representation goes down)? Have the workers themselves become more productive, or have the tools and techniques they are using become more productive? If the workers themselves are more productive then they can leverage that to demand higher wages and more benefits…after all, they would be necessary to a businesses bottom line, and could sell their more productive services to the highest bidder. Sadly, this isn’t the case, because the actual answer is that it’s the tools and expert systems and methodologies that have MADE them more productive, not innate skill and ability. Those same tools can be used by anyone to provide the same levels of productivity…at least, for the needs of the businesses manufacturing those goods or services. Which is why companies CAN outsource and offshore and maintain productivity and profitability. Can’t answer everything now, I pick this. Technology is a mixed bag. It’s not true that tools and methods don’t require new skills to go with them. I’m more productive because of computers, but also because I learned how to use one. In any event, you keep bringing up outsourcing. In the long run, the solution is for those foreign workers to get paid more too. Or do you think they are paid what they ought to be? Do you think American workers should be paid $1 hour too? You think that would be good for us, or for the economy? ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/43 "2013-02-04T20:56:09Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > As for what unions would offer, most workers say they would join one if they could. It’s not a matter of workers not wanting them, just not have access to them. > > [http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp182.html](http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp182.html) Your own cite says that most do NOT want to join: > [@](#): > > Given a choice between a union and no representation, 32% of nonunion workers reported that they would vote for a trade union in a representation election; while 90% of unionized workers said they would vote for their union in a new election. In the sample as a whole, 44% of workers favored union representation. So 32% of non-represented people want to be in a union? That is not “most.” ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/44 "2013-02-04T21:02:33Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > It’s also not an inquisition or **debate team**. I don’t have an opinion on unions one way or another, but did you happen to check out the name of this forum on your way in? (bolding mine) ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/45 "2013-02-04T21:07:15Z")
[QUOTE=lance strongarm] Can’t answer everything now, I pick this. [/QUOTE] I understand…it can be a bit overwhelming when a bunch of posters are replying to you and you are trying to answer them all. When you get the chance. 🙂 > [@](#): > > Technology is a mixed bag. It’s not true that tools and methods don’t require new skills to go with them. I’m more productive because of computers, but also because I learned how to use one. True, but if anyone can learn then you have no specific value add to demand more wages with an expectation of getting them. And I’m using the ‘you’ here to be categorical, not you specifically. That’s the thing…if a large number of people can be trained to run automated or expert systems, then individually you could have outstanding workers that could and do demand higher wages, but not across the board. > [@](#): > > In any event, you keep bringing up outsourcing. In the long run, the solution is for those foreign workers to get paid more too. Or do you think they are paid what they ought to be? Do you think American workers should be paid $1 hour too? You think that would be good for us, or for the economy? They are paid what the market demands in their situation. Ought to be is a silly concept…if everyone was paid what we ought to be paid we’d all be millionaires. In many low wage countries workers are paid low because, low as it seems to be to us, it’s a lot more than they could otherwise make in local labor, thus it’s an advantage to them to take those jobs. As their standard of living rises then there wages will invariably rise…this is already happening in both India and China. Eventually, they too will price themselves out of the low end labor market, just as we have. The answer to this won’t be for them to attempt to artificially maintain ever increasing wages just because, but to shift to some other value added niche market that they can use their own advantage towards to remain competitive. As for us, I think we’ve basically priced ourselves out of the low end labor market. Even minimum wage, which seems ridiculously low to many on this board, is much much higher than comparable (or even grossly incomparable) labor in other countries. In some countries, 10 US dollars an hour would buy you a decent engineer or mid-level manager…here, that’s the wage a kid out of highschool working at 7-11 and basically scanning a bar code into a terminal and punching in a credit card, ATM card or maybe cash (after telling the machine exactly what the customer is giving and it telling the kid what the exact change is) would make. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/46 "2013-02-04T21:27:00Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > But those consumers are wealthier because they have union jobs that pay higher wages. Then what you are proposing is pretty much the definition of inflation. Who loses during inflation are the consumers who don’t – or can’t – increase their income to keep pace. There’s nothing wrong with higher wages, as long as higher productivity accompanies it. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/47 "2013-02-04T21:28:59Z")
My wife asked me why companies outsource. I ask her this. If you can have a blouse made in China and pay $20, or have the exact one on the same table made in American by union workers for $25, which one do you buy? The answer in that the worldwide consumer has made this choice. This ends the conversation. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2013, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/48 "2013-02-04T22:29:12Z")
I like the results of unions (middle class, decent hours/wages, workplace safety), but not unions themselves or their methods. Ideally, it should be easy to fire people and there shouldn’t be a minimum wage (among other things). But also, there should be a strong cash-based safety net, and high quality health care and education should be available to everyone for free. (Again, among other things.) Freedom for the employer, freedom for the employee. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/49 "2013-02-05T01:02:34Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > Not at all. One of the arguments that the OP was using in support of unions was that they would give the American worker more cash that he/she can spent to further drive the economy. My point was that that seemed like an artificial way to prime the pump, not dissimilar to tax stimulus packages and the like, and a poor argument for unions. If you a just trying to artificially put more money in the economy, there are other ways to do that. I don’t advocate any of them. Obviously unions exist in order for workers to benefit more from their labor. This usually includes getting paid more because of union efforts, and I don’t see why you call this “artificial.” It’s simply a consequence of increased wages that they lead to more spending. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/50 "2013-02-05T01:19:33Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Jeez, and I was trying hard not to post too much and violate copyright. > > Okay, in my own words - unions keep wages up, and that is good even for non-union workers. Growing wages keep consumer spending going, and that helps the economy. Yeah, big lot of good that does when the economy tanks and the unions refuse to recognize that taking a cut in salary is a hell of a lot better than getting a pink slip. [quote] ---
**Author:** ![desertmonk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@desertmonk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/desertmonk)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/51 "2013-02-05T01:38:14Z")
I think it is more likely that high union wages were a product of the strong U.S. economy in the post-WW2 era rather than the force that drove that economy. Also, slight side-track, was Henry Ford’s famous “$5 a day” wage designed to create a middle class that would buy the Model T or was it mostly to attract the best talent in an industry with lots of turnover? ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/52 "2013-02-05T13:24:27Z")
Henry Ford hated unions but he was the one who doubled wages to 5$ a day. Not to create people who could buy his cars but to keep workers around. The way he was able to do this was by making his assembly lines so productive. This is how wages go up, capital investments makes workers more productive and this allows employers to pay workers more. Unions make firms and industries less competitive and have less money for capital investments. Everyone is aware how the UAW has bankrupted two of the big three automakers and cost the taxpayers 35 billion dollars. If you look at other industries you see the same things repeated. Look at the american steel industry, it was once the envy of the world now the places that relied on steel mills for employment are ghost towns. Those of us old enough to remember the film “Norma Rae” about the unionization of a textile factory in North Carolina should not be surprised to find out that the factory closed along with over 150 other textile factories. Those a little older may remember how the typesetters union turned New York from city with 7 daily newspapers into one with three daily newspapers. It was just in the news a few months ago how unions made Hostess go into bankruptcy. This is the reason for the decline of unions, simple Darwinian logic, firms and industries that have unions go out of business and firms and industries that don’t have unions grow. The decline of unions is good news for everyone who wants a job and everyone who wants to keep one. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/53 "2013-02-05T13:30:23Z")
> [@desertmonk](#): > > I think it is more likely that high union wages were a product of the strong U.S. economy in the post-WW2 era rather than the force that drove that economy. Employers would have paid those wages anyway? They never said no to union demands? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/54 "2013-02-05T13:31:35Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > Everyone is aware how the UAW has bankrupted two of the big three automakers and cost the taxpayers 35 billion dollars. No we’re not. Prove it. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/55 "2013-02-05T19:22:10Z")
If unions were the “answer” to American Labor’s problems, Detroit would be jumping. (It ain’t). One big problem with unions-as they get larger and more powerful, they start to distate to management-and when they cause problems in production, employers move away…to non-union states. That and the corruption-read the history of the Teamsters. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/56 "2013-02-05T19:25:42Z")
According to this [article](http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/26/news/companies/pluggedin_taylor_ford.fortune/index.htm)written before the bailouts union rules and payouts cost the domestic automakers 2,500 dollars per car sold. The reason GM and Chrysler had to go into bankruptcy was they lost 1,400 dollars per car sold. If they did not have the extra costs from their unions they would have been profitable. Here is an article that states the loss from the GM bailout will be 25 billion dollars, and the loss from the Chrysler bailout was 1.3 billion dollars. This [article](http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121220/AUTO0103/212200379)states that GM got 16 billion dollars worth of tax write offs in the bailout. Here is an [article](http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121220/AUTO0103/212200379)about how 28 billion dollars of the bailout could have been avoided by treating the UAW as it would have been treated in a normal bankruptcy. ---
**Author:** ![Asympotically\_fat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47c2d/32.png) [@Asympotically\_fat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asympotically_fat)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/57 "2013-02-05T19:27:56Z")
I’m only posting because I though this thread was about unicorns, but I do agree unions play an important part in an economy and it is certainly not a good thing for them to become marginalized. However the US unions had serious problems, not least massive corruption and links to organised crime and partly what has happened is that they have failed to reform and modernize themselves, which has allowed anti-union forces to push them to the sidelines. Other than that I think unicorns had their day a long time ago. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/58 "2013-02-05T20:06:14Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > My wife asked me why companies outsource. > > I ask her this. If you can have a blouse made in China and pay $20, or have the exact one on the same table made in American by union workers for $25, which one do you buy? > > The answer in that the worldwide consumer has made this choice. > > This ends the conversation. I might be willing to pay a $5 premium, under some circumstances. The problem is that the domestic, union-produced shirt is going to be more like $40-65, if the foreign-made one is $25. I’m not paying that much extra. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/59 "2013-02-05T20:53:25Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > According to this [article](http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/26/news/companies/pluggedin_taylor_ford.fortune/index.htm)written before the bailouts union rules and payouts cost the domestic automakers 2,500 dollars per car sold. The reason GM and Chrysler had to go into bankruptcy was they lost 1,400 dollars per car sold. If they did not have the extra costs from their unions they would have been profitable. > Here is an article that states the loss from the GM bailout will be 25 billion dollars, and the loss from the Chrysler bailout was 1.3 billion dollars. This [article](http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121220/AUTO0103/212200379)states that GM got 16 billion dollars worth of tax write offs in the bailout. > Here is an [article](http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121220/AUTO0103/212200379)about how 28 billion dollars of the bailout could have been avoided by treating the UAW as it would have been treated in a normal bankruptcy. That’s not a union cost – it’s health care costs for the labor (which were negotiated through the unions, but do you really think that they wouldn’t need health benefits to hold workers? Toyota doesn’t have health care costs in Jsapan because the companies don’t have to provide health benefits. GM has to pay rretiree costs because that’s another required cost for years of labor – again, negotiated through unions, but do you think that GM would’ve been able to lure and hold workers without them? Toyota USA doesn’t have the costs because – as the article you cite says, they don’t have a lot of retirees. The company hasn’t been manufacturing in the US anywhere near as long as GM. The comparison is apples and oranges. Trying to blame the failure on the “greed of the unions” with this kind of evidence is absurd. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2013, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319/60 "2013-02-05T21:37:27Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > That’s not a union cost – it’s health care costs for the labor (which were negotiated through the unions, but do you really think that they wouldn’t need health benefits to hold workers? … > > GM has to pay rretiree costs because that’s another required cost for years of labor – again, negotiated through unions, but do you think that GM would’ve been able to lure and hold workers without them? False dilemma. We aren’t discussing a situation of “no benefits”; we are discussing one of “excessive expensive benefits benefits”, which, as you correctly point out, were demanded by the unions. Non-union jobs also provide health care insurance, as I am sure you are aware. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/649319.md?page=4)