There is a widespread belief among workers, those who are ignorant about the laws of economics, that unions can actually raise wages. In spite of the overwhelming evidence that labor productivity is the fundamental determinant of wages, the falsehood persists.
Union advocates believe that only unions can construct a protective wall between the employee and employers, who they say, only care about the bottom line and thus skimp when it comes to wages. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Unions are not about workers verses management, but are in fact is about pitting one group of workers against another group. Successful unions are those which are able to exclude workers, and the unions most able to exclude workers are those composed of skilled workers because they are the most difficult to replace.
When a union strikes, they are not merely refusing to work but preventing any labor offered to the employer. Those workers crossing a picket line are called "scabs," thereby illustrating the lack of working class solidarity and showing beyond all doubt that the issue is one group of workers against other workers.
Unions raising wages is an illusion. When unions are successful at raising wages, they do so only at the expense of reducing the number of workers. Those unable to find work in the unionized sector must find work in the non-unionized sector, there by depressing the wages in the non-unionized sector. Unions do not actually raise wages, but in fact increase wages in one group (unionized) at the expense of lowering wages for the remaining (non-unionized) workers.
If you think you can feel comfortably secure in a unionized job, you had better consider the ultimate outcome. General Motors and their UAW unionized workforce illustrate perfectly what happens when a union gets stranglehold on an energetic company. The average cost of making an auto for both GM and nonunion Toyota is about the same. But while Toyota makes a profit of $2000 per vehicle, GM suffers a loss of $1,200 per vehicle. GM can't stay in business much longer at this rate (and Ford and Chrysler are not far behind). Tens of thousands of workers have already been laid off. There is a real danger of the American auto industry to vanish resulting in the unemployment of millions of workers.
By the time this happens, union leaders, who could care less about these hapless workers, will have salted away the millions of dollars they extracted from workers who thought they could depend on the unions to look after their welfare.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 7
You make a very weak case for what you are trying to say. For example, what are the differences between wages at Toyota vs. GM? What about health benefits, pensions, working conditions.
I was a member of a union in the 1970's while teaching, have not been so since 1976, yet the history of unions suggest that they have been instrumental in moving debate along on minimum wages, social security, and pension benefits.
So you need to make more of a case or your argument sounds just like a rant, nothing more.
If it weren't for Unions there would be no minimum wage, no child labor laws, no workers safety regulations.
If you can do your job with out getting killed or maimed, thank someone whose paid their dues!
Here in NY, we had a transit strike that was pointless and horrible and most people blamed the union and the workers, but then management continually finds many millions after these disputes are over. I know if I kept losing and finding hundreds of millions of dollars, I would lose my job. The people who do this are paid well over $100k a year and they never ride the subway.