World Bank: Unions Good for the Economy

[ulmont]

Solidarity foreeeeeever!  Solidarity foreeeeever!  Solidarity foreeeeever!  The Union makes us strong!

In the world of having to choose between business, government, and unions, I'd take the unions at least 9 times out of 10.

[DGuller]

Sure, in much the same way that big business lobby groups don't represent any classes either.

In a completely different way.  There are lobbying groups such as the Chamber of Commerce that lobby on issues that affect all members like tax rates, SEC filings, etc.  When's the last time a union lobbied to increase my pay?

Are there any unions active in your field?

Because I can tell you that in several fields labour standards and wages are a big deal for unions, and they want to increase them (and working conditions) for non-members as well.

If you were, for example, a non-unionized fruit picker in the US or a worker in a garment factory in Vietnam, the relevant unions are in fact lobbying to increase your pay and improve your working conditions.

That's hardly surprising.  Making their competition less competetive is good for them.

[dps]

Sure, in much the same way that big business lobby groups don't represent any classes either.

In a completely different way.  There are lobbying groups such as the Chamber of Commerce that lobby on issues that affect all members like tax rates, SEC filings, etc.  When's the last time a union lobbied to increase my pay?

While possibly not your pay, I am aware of unions that have lobbied in recent memory to raise minimum wages which are not applicable to any of their actual members.

While I'm probably one of the more anti-union posters here, I certainly acknowledge that unions have, in fact, lobbied for increases in the minimum wage.

Of course, IMO increasing the minimum wage is just a form of political posturing that doesn't really do anything to help workers at the bottom of the totem pole, and may well be counter-productive, so that's hardly a point in favor of unions anyway.

[ulmont]

Of course, IMO increasing the minimum wage is just a form of political posturing that doesn't really do anything to help workers at the bottom of the totem pole, and may well be counter-productive, so that's hardly a point in favor of unions anyway.

*shrug*  Stats on the minimum wage as applied to employment are slightly less reliable than the stats on gun control.  The one thing you can say is that someone who was making minimum before the wage got hiked, if they have a job the next day, is making more money.

[Admiral Yi]

In the world of having to choose between business, government, and unions, I'd take the unions at least 9 times out of 10.

In the world of overpaying public employees and not overpaying them, I'd take not overpaying them 10 times out of 10.

[Grey Fox]

In the world of having to choose between business, government, and unions, I'd take the unions at least 9 times out of 10.

In the world of overpaying public employees and not overpaying them, I'd take not overpaying them 10 times out of 10.

They are not overpaid. Private entreprise employees are simply drasticly underpaid.

[Richard Hakluyt]

The minimum wage was introduced in the UK a few years back and had no detectable effect on unemployment. It is currently £6.08 an hour, which isn't great, especially in London, but it has benefited a lot of low-paid workers who were essentially being exploited.

[ulmont]

In the world of having to choose between business, government, and unions, I'd take the unions at least 9 times out of 10.

In the world of overpaying public employees and not overpaying them, I'd take not overpaying them 10 times out of 10.

I'll start caring about public employees been overpaid when CEOs stop being overpaid.

[derspiess]

Unions suck.

Alright.

A serious question for you, derSpiess:

Who should represent the interests of workers?

Corporations, large and small, have a lot of power in relation to the individual worker. They have more money, in most cases they need any given worker much less than the worker needs them, and they have the organization and capital to influence both the public discourse and lobby the political system in directions favourable to them.

In theory, and often in practice, unions represent the interest of workers both in dealings with organized business interests and the political system; granted they do so imperfectly.

So lets say we get rid of unions. Either people stop joining them altogether or legislation render them utterly useless. How are the interests of workers represented?

- Are the interests of workers simply irrelevant?
- Are individual votes of workers and their ability to quit a job they're unhappy with enough to counter the spending and lobbying of organized business interests, so worker's interests will be represented just fine?
- Or is there some other, better way for interests to be represented?

And to be clear, when I say worker's interests I mean things like formulating and enforcing workplace safety and health standards, addressing grievances (sexual harassment, unfair and abusive treatment, plain old fraud victimizing workers etc) and the like?

As an employee I prefer to address my interests myself.

But believe it or not, I am not *that* anti-union, at least not in the sense that I want private sector unions outlawed or otherwise forcibly done away with.  Although I think they're less relevant today, private sector unions do still have a reason to exist.  They're bad when they grow too powerful, but on balance I'd rather have them around.

Public sector unions can take a flying leap, however.

[The Brain]

I'm underpaid, oversexed and over here.

[Admiral Yi]

I'll start caring about public employees been overpaid when CEOs stop being overpaid.

I'll start caring about the price of gasoline when the price of lobster goes down.

[Jacob]

As an employee I prefer to address my interests myself.

Fair enough.

Do you feel you're on an even footing with employers?

Do you think that all employees are as well equipped to address their interests in the face of organized business interests?

But believe it or not, I am not *that* anti-union, at least not in the sense that I want private sector unions outlawed or otherwise forcibly done away with.  Although I think they're less relevant today, private sector unions do still have a reason to exist.  They're bad when they grow too powerful, but on balance I'd rather have them around.

Cool.

Public sector unions can take a flying leap, however.

What makes them different?

[CountDeMoney]

Public sector unions can take a flying leap, however.

What makes them different?

They aren't him.

[MadImmortalMan]

What makes them different?

They do have a different set of interests than a normal union. They have more leverage over the counterparties they are negotiating with for one thing.

A person in public service has responsibilities regular employees do not, such as a trust to the citizens first. They play a different role in society than a normal worker because they are doing the things that cannot be done by private actors. So there is validity to the point that their unions should have different rules I think. Firefighters can't strike while the city burns--that's betraying the public trust.

[CountDeMoney]

Firefighters can't strike while the city burns--that's betraying the public trust.

Sure they can.