The Great Union-Busting Thread

[JonasSalk]

I wonder what kinds of hours we would be working now if it weren't for the labor unions.

Probably even fewer, because they've held back technological and economic progress in the country.  Some estimates say that they've caused, over the decades, several trillions of dollars in economic damage.

[DGuller]

I wonder what kinds of hours we would be working now if it weren't for the labor unions.

Probably even fewer, because they've held back technological and economic progress in the country.  Some estimates say that they've caused, over the decades, several trillions of dollars in economic damage.

You are assuming that economic growth reduces the average number of hours worked.  That has not exactly been the case in the last half a century.

[DGuller]

In fact, one of the few things that I think unions are good at is promoting a more acceptable work-life balance.  It's not easy for an individual employee to negotiate working 6 hour days when everyone else works 8 hour days, even if he's willing to take the paycut.  If you work at an assembly line, you pretty much have to work on the same schedule as all your other co-workers.

[The Brain]

Swedish unions are a very destructive force. They serve no legitimate purpose. Our laws are sufficient to protect workers, no need for organized losers.

I could have been in a union, had I wanted to. If I had I would make a LOT less than I do now. Because unions hate productive employees. When great employees get more money it increases "inequality".

On the bright side we don't have closed shops in Sweden AFAIK. The exception was when you studied at university, but I don't know if that's still the case.

Also, Swedish unions are losing members at a great rate.

[grumbler]

Hmm-- could we then also vote for who gets teaching positions?

I suppose we could all vote for who gets every job in the country.  Not sure why anyone would want to do that, but we could do it.

[grumbler]

Of course, we have to reassess if we want people to be teachers. Long vacations are great, but if you are shelling out lots of money for an advanced degree and then likely end up with no job, not really sure the allure of long vacations will draw anyone sensible.

Actually, the whole "long vacations" thing is a bit over-done.  The teachers at the public schools here have a total of ten weeks off due to Christmas, Spring Break, and summer.  I had six weeks off in the military, with much better pay.  In my beltway bandit job I had five weeks off and much, much better pay than a teacher gets.

[Pat]

"Swedish unions are a very destructive force. They serve no legitimate purpose. Our laws are sufficient to protect workers, no need for organized losers."

That's just not true. You clearly know nothing about how the labour market in this country works. The classic Swedish model is for the state to not legislate and leave it to employers and employees to collectively negotiate the terms of the labour market. This was the case for most of the 1900s until the 70s when we got the two major laws we have today, LAS and MBL. LAS removed the free right to fire employees but is today a weak law that can be easily bypassed. MBL makes most of the collective bargaining agreement normative as a minimum for the whole workplace. This is called "kollektivavtals utfyllande verkan" (google it). So you enjoy protection and benefit from the collective agreement even though you're not a member. This also explains why a lot of people aren't members. It is not that we have a lot of laws protecting employees. Because we don't. That's just bullshit.

[CountDeMoney]

Actually, the whole "long vacations" thing is a bit over-done.  The teachers at the public schools here have a total of ten weeks off due to Christmas, Spring Break, and summer.  I had six weeks off in the military, with much better pay.  In my beltway bandit job I had five weeks off and much, much better pay than a teacher gets.

But teachers are destroying the economy from within. And for that they must pay.

[Admiral Yi]

In fact, one of the few things that I think unions are good at is promoting a more acceptable work-life balance.  It's not easy for an individual employee to negotiate working 6 hour days when everyone else works 8 hour days, even if he's willing to take the paycut.  If you work at an assembly line, you pretty much have to work on the same schedule as all your other co-workers.

The mechanism you describe seems to have more to do with the nature of the work than with the nature of the employee/employer relationship.

[Razgovory]

I wonder what kinds of hours we would be working now if it weren't for the labor unions.

Probably even fewer, because they've held back technological and economic progress in the country.  Some estimates say that they've caused, over the decades, several trillions of dollars in economic damage.

Some estimate say they have prevented us from reaching the technological singularity and the land of milkshakes and hand jobs.

[Razgovory]

I wonder what kinds of hours we would be working now if it weren't for the labor unions.

Something very similar to what we're working now.  Henry Ford supported a 40-hour workweek without being whined at by unions.

Mr. Ford used a domestic terrorist group against unions.  Also got a medal from Hitler and helped build the Soviet automotive industry.  He'd have been saddened to know that the armored vehicles built by the factory he helped start did so poorly in killing Jews in the Six day war and the Yom Kippur war.

[The Brain]

"Swedish unions are a very destructive force. They serve no legitimate purpose. Our laws are sufficient to protect workers, no need for organized losers."

That's just not true. You clearly know nothing about how the labour market in this country works. The classic Swedish model is for the state to not legislate and leave it to employers and employees to collectively negotiate the terms of the labour market. This was the case for most of the 1900s until the 70s when we got the two major laws we have today, LAS and MBL. LAS removed the free right to fire employees but is today a weak law that can be easily bypassed. MBL makes most of the collective bargaining agreement normative as a minimum for the whole workplace. This is called "kollektivavtals utfyllande verkan" (google it). So you enjoy protection and benefit from the collective agreement even though you're not a member. This also explains why a lot of people aren't members. It is not that we have a lot of laws protecting employees. Because we don't. That's just bullshit.

What kind of worker needs to be protected from supply and demand? Worker safety is heavily regulated and does not depend on unions.

[KRonn]

Of course, we have to reassess if we want people to be teachers. Long vacations are great, but if you are shelling out lots of money for an advanced degree and then likely end up with no job, not really sure the allure of long vacations will draw anyone sensible.

Actually, the whole "long vacations" thing is a bit over-done.  The teachers at the public schools here have a total of ten weeks off due to Christmas, Spring Break, and summer.  I had six weeks off in the military, with much better pay.  In my beltway bandit job I had five weeks off and much, much better pay than a teacher gets.

I don't have a problem with teacher vacations. And I'm tired of the teacher bashing that goes on. The education system has problems, as do the unions which people can argue may cause additional problems, but the teachers are trying to do a decent job, just like the rest of us in our jobs. The system is broken if kids aren't learning.

In fact, while I agree with what Gov Walker is doing, as many other states are taking some measures though not all as strong, I take issue with the bashing of public workers that this debate sometimes devolves into. It's not the workers, but the union - politician corrupt like connection which give them rights to retire in the 40s and 50s, pay nothing towards benefits and health care, and other items that I have a problem with. I have no problem with a soldier retiring after 20 years, but not for public workers driving buses, office workers, or such. Cops and firefighters can perhaps be given earlier retirement as their jobs are dangerous and more difficult to keep with as someone ages.

Even Massachusetts union leaders have started talking about making some concessions. They see the writing on the wall, though in MA they're pretty safe. I'd be shocked if the Dems here did too much to rock the boat. Though Gov Patrick has floated some ideas and suggestions to help ease financial strains on towns/cities, not too far off some of what Walker is legislating. Gov Patrick suggested that towns pool together for worker benefits, which requires the agreement of each town's local union. That's not happening so well, but it's similar to some of what Walker is putting into law, from what I can tell.

[Pat]

Question: You say they serve no legitimate purpose. The Swedish model allows decentralised rule-making that can be tailored to fit the most diverse of fields and work-places. Would you rather we had bulky all-encompassing laws? Because that's the alternative. Unions are heavily involved in worker safety. Arbetsmiljölagen (labour environment law) is based on the principle of co-operation between employers and employees. Skyddsombud (worker's protection representatives) are chosen by the union. They are required on all work-places with more than five employees and have wide-ranging rights including the right to order immediate halt of all work if found necessary for the health and safety of the employees.

[grumbler]

I would agree with the concept that bashing the people because you don't like the results is absurd.  when crime rates go up, we don't reduce police salaries; when obesity increases, we don't chop doctor's benefits. 

There certainly is a problem with public education in the US, just as there is a problem with private health care.  These are  systemic problems, though, not ones that lie at the feet of teachers and doctors and nurses.   If wages and benefits are out of line (and i am not sure that they are), then a responsible leadership will rein them in, even if that means taking on powerful interests.  It seems clear to me that all of the current efforts to rein in sending on public sector compensation are not created equal.  walker's approach, for instance, seems to me to be far less intelligent and principled than the approach  taken by Mitch Daniels in Indiana, for instance.