Would You Accept?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Union leaders effectively killing a company's ability to remain competitive and ultimately causing them to either lose business since they can't compete on product price or to take their business elsewhere (or close completely) leaving all those workers who got a little more money without a job at all. Holding a company hostage until they pay more may be called collective bargaining but in reality, it is not much more than extortion.

I hesitate to post on this issue because it's way above my pay grade, and way above my intelligence quotient. However, as the song says, "fools rush in where wise men fear to tread".

Full disclosure: I worked as part of a union, and I've worked with no union. Right now, no union, I'm an "at will" employee.

To add to Camron's well written, rational, and intelligent, statement above, companies can always "bust" the union and hire new permanent employees, employees that would be relatively easy to find with unemployment as it is today. Also, at some point the union leadership, as well as the rank and file membership, must realize that companies do have a breaking point, and demand, or ask, for just what they need, or deserve, without breaking the company, which would be like not killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

The pendulum swings both ways. Back in the nineteenth century, before unions became popular in the United States, there was no middle class. You made a ton of money if you owned the company, or were in management, or you worked for the company and made little money. Back then, in "Company Store" times, working conditions were horrible, but the workers had no other choices if they wanted to feed their families.

Then two things happened, unions, and government regulations. The coal mine strikes, and the factory strikes, of the early twentieth century all helped the workers get a foot into the middle class door. Child labor laws, workmen's compensation, unemployment benefits, minimum wage laws, OSHA, etc., all certainly helped the labor movement.

And then, maybe back in the 1960's, or 1970's, the labor unions got just a little bit too aggressive, causing many companies to struggle under union contracts.

Now, it may be time for the pendulum to swing back the other way. And don't think that government regulations alone can replace unions. Studies have shown that government regulations alone do not work, that companies will try to get away with any loophole that they can find in government regulations. There is a place for unions in the modern working environment, it's just time for them to dial it back just a little bit.