Juan_Bottom wrote:
Then how could Unions have ever existed in the first place, let alone grow.
Because conditions are different now than when unions began forming.
That's the point I'm making, changing conditions always require changing responses. Unions are slow to change, are they not?
At it's peak (in the 1940's) the private labor unions were about 34% of workers were in a union. Public sector union membership at the same time was around 10%.
In 2009, the number was 7% of workers were in a labor union. At the same time, public union membership is around 36%.
As I've said, I have no problem at all with private unions. I just think individuals should be given a choice, though, and I suppose they do in a way. That is, one should not be required to join a union. However, if a company requires that it's workers be in a union and an individual wishes not to be, then the individual need not work there.
But that's a whole other issue.
One of the biggest killers of private labor unions is, Globalization. It's ironic, the very people who are all gaga over unions and just think they are great, are also the very people who say things like "The US needs to start being part of the World community instead of trying to rule over it", or "The UN should hold precedence over the Constitution" or the anti-nationalistic or those who don't believe in State sovereignty above that of global institutions (like the UN) and other such pro globalization stances.
It's hard for US companies which often enough by union contract must pay for generous benefits and wages (which is all good, a deal is a deal, after all) but in other nations, with whom these companies must compete, don't give a rat's azz about such things.
What would be considered a living wage in someplace, like India, is far different than what you would call a living wage.
Thus, the unionized companies, unable to compete with other companies based in countries with much cheaper labor costs (because that's what unions are in many ways, labor costs) go out of business or leave the country. Either way, all those unions jobs go away, don't they?
If you think about it, complaining that a place like China is unfair to it's workers, is ironic being as everyone is supposedly treated the same. There is no need for labor unions in China, because after all, it was the workers who are supposedly in charge (though we know the truth, don't we?). Theoretically.
Even if these other nations were forced by the WTO to create labor unions, do you think the demands in those nations would be the same as those in the US? Where our workers would need, IDK, what's a livable wage these days? I guess it depends on the region, but lets say it $20 an hour. In some third world nation, the equivalent cost would be something like $5 an hour, and the workers would think it's great. Especially as many of you have noted, the people in many other nations of the world make it by with mere pennies on the dollar what the typical family in the US needs.
Just sayin' is all. The unions operate in a vacuum, or try to at least. The Union is supposed to get the most they can for the worker, despite what the conditions around the world would dictate what the wages and benefits can be and still maintain a business. The union has a narrow view, but there are always factors outside that view that affect companies and the workers. And often enough it's out of the control of the companies and the unions and the workers.
The Hostess people walked off the job. Hostess went Kaput. So what's the problem? The workers walked off the job, they took a risk, didn't they? It didn't pay off this time. But it's ok because now those workers can find new jobs, possibly better jobs, depending on the individual and the skill sets they possess.
After all, isn't the economy improving?
Isn't that what we are told, that's the line of the Central Government? That things are working? That the Administrations economic plans are bearing fruit?
If so, then no worries, these people will find jobs and in the grand scheme of things people will be better off (so long as the propaganda we are being fed is true....)
And that's what it really comes down to. The skills of the individual. The more skills one has the greater opportunities life offers. Those who are unskilled are going to have a much harder time making it. And there is nothing truly unfair about that, that's just the consequences individuals must face for their own decisions.
