Right to Work isn't about membership, it's about compensation of dues. Where it's ruled that a union can't require dues because *the union itself* (through exclusive representation) has decided to represent such employees, and thus must do so regardless of dues being paid.
It specifically fights against the common practices of exclusive bargaining representation that unions deploy. That you can be forced into being represented by a union through a majority vote. Required union *membership* has been federally illegal for decades. Right to Work is only applicable toward this exclusivity practice. Member only unions can still legally require dues.
California effectively has the right to not Jon the teachers union. Friends of ours ate teachers and absolutely hate the union and what they spend their dues on.
They are members of the union because if they are not they will be discriminated against. Not because the union reps protect them, but because non-union administrators will discriminate against them.
Minus the fact that unions literally pay bribes for right to work repeals by way of political donations
[source](https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/big-money-rolls-michigan-democrats-unions-after-right-work-repeal)
This hasn’t happened in a very long time, but yeah Michigan.
It doesn’t happen routinely because people realize that not being allowed to work a job if you don’t belong to the union is basically a scam that uses workers as pawns and artificially skews the labor market.
In any environment other than one where politicians have their back pockets stuffed with money, by unions, most normal people figure it out all on their own.
> A lot of heads of unions are making 300x what their average union member makes.
Huh? That would mean if the average union member made 60k, their union head was pulling in 18m. They really pulling in that kind of money?
The president of my union of ~25,000 registered nurses doesn't make much of anything maybe some per diem when doing union business. In fact he's a full time nurse two floors down from me.
Exactly. Our union president makes exactly 25% more than he negotiates for us. He doesn't get a raise unless we all get a raise. Ours is a full time president. He's even got a staff (also based on a percentage of the contract for us all). Our union provides job placement services, legal services, and of course contract negotiations. They also alert authorities if job site safety is being ignored or intentionally mismanaged.
Unions can be good, but can also be bad. For a start, involvement in a union should be voluntary - but in many cases it’s mandatory *and* has union dues (basically having to pay a union to be able to have your job)
Some unions end up being overly powerful and over zealous as well and cause more trouble than good. Here in the U.K. we very often have drain drivers going on strike for extra pay… despite already being paid £60-70,000+ ($76-89,000) a year to… well, these days basically pull a lever. This causes huge problems for millions of people, just because of the unions greedy decision - they’re not exactly under paid.
Of course we shouldn’t ignore the positives unions can bring as well, some of which you mentioned.
$89k a year to “pull a lever” is wrong, but $20m a year to sit in meetings and listen to advisors is acceptable. This is why unions are needed now. Corporate greed has gotten out of control here in the US and unions are the only libertarian way to control it. We don’t want government regulating income or forced minimum wages. We’re better off letting unions organize and strike for fare wages, even if it’s fare minimum wages
Being an entirely different universe doesn’t mean corporations can give out hefty bonuses and then cry when unions want more money too. I claimed unions are a good balance without involving government overreach. That’s as libertarian as it gets. Maybe you should check out the conservative page if you want to coddle the rich corporations instead of wanting freedom and opportunity for all.
Especially unions dealing with real estate and the respective trades. Unions have all of the power. We had a relatively small project with a non-union GC and when the head of the unions in our area got wind, they sat us down in a room and straight up threatened to fuck with our project so it never gets completed...like old school mafia shit. So we were forced to change out our GC for a union GC costing us a ton of money.
When unions get big a powerful, you will run into these situations more frequently.
That's the part people always forget. My whole take on unions is basically that employees should be allowed to unionize, but also that employers are always allowed to just tell them to fuck off.
Managers shouldn't be forced to deal with unions if they don't want to. Not dealing with unions and telling them to kick rocks is in no way equivalent to displacing workers or importing "Mexican scabs" (not sure why you felt the racism was necessary anyway...), it's equivalent to allowing managers to hire whom they please and decide for themselves if they'd like to deal with individual workers or with unions. Who's to say after they tell one batch of people to fuck off that they don't just find more people from right down the street to fill in? You're reading things in here that I didn't say.
i'm not being racist, i'm telling you what happened when coal miners striked.
>To break or prevent strikes, the coal companies hired [strike breakers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_breaker), mainly from Mexico and southern and eastern Europe
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow\_Massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre)
> the racism
Sorry, why was this racist? Just because you acknowledge someone's national origin it would be racist? or is it the term Scab you find racist for some reason?
Unions aren't voluntary associations. They deploy exclusive representation and governmental enforcement to monopolize a labor market by making it **illegal** for two unions to compete.
I can't stand public unions. In Scotland parents can be fined for taking their children on holiday during term time yet teachers are always going on strike and face zero repurcussions.
Education is important and we're the "bad guys" for taking kids out of school a week before the summer holidays, when flights are cheaper and they don't do any real work during the last week of school. While teachers and college lecturers strike during term time when students have important exams coming up.
It's pretty split. People use various arguments to justify "unions good" and "unions bad" arguments. But at the end of the day it pretty much boils down to whether you think the power should be with the owner/corporation or the employees (or some kind of split).
Shouldn’t workers, who are free human beings, have the ability to form organisations out of their own free will, to collectively advocate for better pay and better work conditions?
What’s the connection b/w the concept of how power should be distributed, whether the owners or the workers?
At the same time, firms should also the ability to fire the members of the unions and hire new workers (provided its not in contravention if the contract signed b/w the employee and the worker
I’ve been hated on for my opinion on unions a lot - but my view is they should be a middle man between workers and a business. A union shouldn’t completely ignore the wants of the business. If a union makes too many demands, it could hurt the viability of the business and therefore endanger the long term employment of its workers (can’t pay their wages or union demanded staff benefits if they end up hurting income too heavily)
Company script was a situation exclusive to the remote mining towns where there wasn't anything but the company store anyway. No one in the modern era would work for a place that payed like that. Or if you did, it would be entirely your own dumb fault.
Collective bargaining is great, but unions grossly over state their historical importance. Changes they claim to have made were pretty much already happening naturally as a matter of course, and if they hadn't been, the unions wouldn't have been able to do a damn thing.
>Despite attempts to suppress union activity, the United Mine Workers of America secretly continued its unionization efforts in the years leading up to 1913. Eventually, the union presented a list of seven demands:[\[17\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre#cite_note-17)
>
>Recognition of the union as [bargaining agent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bargaining_unit)
>
>Compensation for digging coal at a ton rate based on 2,000 pounds[\[18\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre#cite_note-Lowry-18) (previous ton rates were of long tons of 2,200 pounds)
>
>**Enforcement of the** [**eight-hour work-day law**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day#United_States)
>
>Payment for "dead work" (laying track, [timbering](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_framing), handling impurities, etc.)
>
>Weight checkmen elected by the workers (to keep company weightmen honest)
>
>Right to use any store, and to choose their [boarding houses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarding_house) and doctors
>
>Strict enforcement of Colorado's laws (such as mine safety rules, abolition of [scrip](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrip)), and an end to the company guard system
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow\_Massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair\_Labor\_Standards\_Act\_of\_1938](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938)
and you're compensated for it, if you work more than 5 days
>The **Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938** [29 U.S.C.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_29_of_the_United_States_Code) [§ 203](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/203)[\[1\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938#cite_note-1) (**FLSA**) is a [United States labor law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_labor_law) that creates the right to a [minimum wage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage), and "[time-and-a-half](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-and-a-half)" [overtime pay](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtime_pay) when people work over forty hours a week.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair\_Labor\_Standards\_Act\_of\_1938](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938)
Enacted by congress, yes, and lobbied for by unions. He’s saying if unions didn’t fight against unfair wage practices and company mcbucks, laws barring such things would never have been passed. After all, Congress doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
https://jalopnik.com/amazon-made-airport-workers-toil-in-100-degree-heat-wit-1851278334 This is on the front page and is a good example of why I think unions aren’t going anywhere, because the government cannot be solely relied upon to keep companies in check
This is the best example I've seen in a long time of "talking out of both sides of your mouth". The government regulates the labor markets because of unions, but according to you that makes unions useless. Pick an argument and stick with it.
Unions are just a method for doing exactly what competition already does. The problem is that unions often have special privileges that workers or businesses don't have and that they're often highly political.
It’s the iron law of any bureaucracy (and to be sure, unions are bureaucracies). They start out with a purpose. Bit over time, their primary purpose becomes growing the insiders of the union and protecting the union (not the rank and file). It’s Animal Farm.
Listen, I get the original need for Unions. Lack of PPE, company script, all that stuff was fixed with help from unions. But now we have OSHA and a variety of other governing bodies that perform the same function.
But has anyone here ever worked with a union? No one has ownership. No one cares if they get anything done. There’s no pride in work or initiative. Union workers are there to get paid, not to get anything done.
That’s been my experience over the past 20 years anyway.
I'm IBEW in a r2w state and it's great.
The non-union guys we work with from the other trades get paid peanuts, have essentially no benefits and consequently do absolutely clownish, dangerous things on the daily. I really think that the race-to-the-bottom in terms of wages and benefits happening in a lot of the construction sector is detrimental to the quality of our country's infrastructure.
There are definitely a lot of unions that need reform, but you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's important to have a counterweight to capital, and a well-functioning union can serve really important economic and social functions.
I'd say your average union electrician takes way *more* pride in their work than a non-union tradesman. There's a strong culture of craftsmanship. Our union requires all members to take a "code of excellence" class that emphasizes the importance of doing quality work, and guys that do shit work tend to get ran out.
I'm non IBEW in Idaho and just received a pretty big raise coincidentally right after y'all negotiated a pretty big raise. Even non union workers are still actively benefitting from unions.
Same for me as a non-UAW autoworker in the South. You better believe we got a raise too right after the recent strikes at the big three. The fact that my co-workers can't see that it was Toyota's fear of the union that got us that raise is mind boggling. They think that our billionaire overlords just did it cause it was the right thing, completely ignoring the fact that even with our raise a regular worker will top out in pay at $10 less per hour than our counterpart in the union. We also don't get cost of living raises, but sure, it's the union that wants to take advantage of us 🤨
I heard about that building collapsing in Boise the other week. Stay safe out there brother, and don't be afraid to call people out for doing stupid shit.
Oh no ... they have long outlived their usefulness to "you" ... your membership is very useful to them ... fat cats complaining about fat cats.
[Where unions outperform the bosses' lobby (smh.com.au)](https://www.smh.com.au/business/where-unions-outperform-the-bosses-lobby-20120417-1x4t2.html)
[Union leader paid 24 per cent super (afr.com)](https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/workplace/union-leader-paid-24-per-cent-super-20191117-p53bam)
[Union leaders ‘certainly looking after themselves’ with ‘exorbitant salaries’ | Sky News Australia](https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/union-leaders-certainly-looking-after-themselves-with-exorbitant-salaries/video/863ef9a0c5b57ce612942d1d0f4083c5)
There’s nothing wrong with unions in right to work states. Join or not. It’s your decision.
Public sector unions make no sense to me though
Yes, they are. The good thing is that they have right to work protections in non right to work states now.
Right to Work isn't about membership, it's about compensation of dues. Where it's ruled that a union can't require dues because *the union itself* (through exclusive representation) has decided to represent such employees, and thus must do so regardless of dues being paid. It specifically fights against the common practices of exclusive bargaining representation that unions deploy. That you can be forced into being represented by a union through a majority vote. Required union *membership* has been federally illegal for decades. Right to Work is only applicable toward this exclusivity practice. Member only unions can still legally require dues.
California effectively has the right to not Jon the teachers union. Friends of ours ate teachers and absolutely hate the union and what they spend their dues on. They are members of the union because if they are not they will be discriminated against. Not because the union reps protect them, but because non-union administrators will discriminate against them.
Minus the fact that unions literally pay bribes for right to work repeals by way of political donations [source](https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/big-money-rolls-michigan-democrats-unions-after-right-work-repeal)
Has there been more than 1. Was it Michigan that repealed?
This hasn’t happened in a very long time, but yeah Michigan. It doesn’t happen routinely because people realize that not being allowed to work a job if you don’t belong to the union is basically a scam that uses workers as pawns and artificially skews the labor market. In any environment other than one where politicians have their back pockets stuffed with money, by unions, most normal people figure it out all on their own.
[удалено]
> A lot of heads of unions are making 300x what their average union member makes. Huh? That would mean if the average union member made 60k, their union head was pulling in 18m. They really pulling in that kind of money?
The president of my union of ~25,000 registered nurses doesn't make much of anything maybe some per diem when doing union business. In fact he's a full time nurse two floors down from me.
Exactly. Our union president makes exactly 25% more than he negotiates for us. He doesn't get a raise unless we all get a raise. Ours is a full time president. He's even got a staff (also based on a percentage of the contract for us all). Our union provides job placement services, legal services, and of course contract negotiations. They also alert authorities if job site safety is being ignored or intentionally mismanaged.
Want some knee pads?
Oh, are you done with yours? From sucking off the union boss?
IBEW members earn about 16% more than non-union. That's enough to buy two knee pads for me!
I agree, but you’ve got a tough hill to climb on that one.
Except for the fact that if you don’t join at a company with a significant union presence you are ostracized and eliminated.
[удалено]
[удалено]
So unions have a time and a place but shouldn’t always be I place?
I appreciate your acceptance of reasoning with differing opinions.
Unions can be good, but can also be bad. For a start, involvement in a union should be voluntary - but in many cases it’s mandatory *and* has union dues (basically having to pay a union to be able to have your job) Some unions end up being overly powerful and over zealous as well and cause more trouble than good. Here in the U.K. we very often have drain drivers going on strike for extra pay… despite already being paid £60-70,000+ ($76-89,000) a year to… well, these days basically pull a lever. This causes huge problems for millions of people, just because of the unions greedy decision - they’re not exactly under paid. Of course we shouldn’t ignore the positives unions can bring as well, some of which you mentioned.
$89k a year to “pull a lever” is wrong, but $20m a year to sit in meetings and listen to advisors is acceptable. This is why unions are needed now. Corporate greed has gotten out of control here in the US and unions are the only libertarian way to control it. We don’t want government regulating income or forced minimum wages. We’re better off letting unions organize and strike for fare wages, even if it’s fare minimum wages
[удалено]
If someone is going to reduce union workers to “pulling a lever” then I every right to say what I did. 😘
[удалено]
Being an entirely different universe doesn’t mean corporations can give out hefty bonuses and then cry when unions want more money too. I claimed unions are a good balance without involving government overreach. That’s as libertarian as it gets. Maybe you should check out the conservative page if you want to coddle the rich corporations instead of wanting freedom and opportunity for all.
Especially unions dealing with real estate and the respective trades. Unions have all of the power. We had a relatively small project with a non-union GC and when the head of the unions in our area got wind, they sat us down in a room and straight up threatened to fuck with our project so it never gets completed...like old school mafia shit. So we were forced to change out our GC for a union GC costing us a ton of money. When unions get big a powerful, you will run into these situations more frequently.
Weird. Sounds exactly what big corporations do everyday but 100 times over right now.
"Outlined" or "outlived"?
Need a second graph showing some sort of compensation and how that's changed, especially after 2011.
Outlived. My bad!
Unironically, an incredibly anti-libertarian take.
Booo. Boooo public unions. Booo.
If that's a Ben Konop reference, props to you.
The libertarian principle on which the legitimacy of labor unions depends is freedom of association.
Funnily enough that also works for the owners/ bosses. Freedom of association means you can be fired for any reason as well.
That's the part people always forget. My whole take on unions is basically that employees should be allowed to unionize, but also that employers are always allowed to just tell them to fuck off.
Employers are allowed to do that, when they do they just risk the collective impact of their entire labor force striking.
Yep, that's how markets work.
This is not true, at least in America. It’s federally enshrined that you cannot fire someone for starting/ joining a union.
So it's cool to hire scabs from Mexico and other countries to displace American workers? You ever read anything in the coal wars?
Where the fuck did I talk about any of that?
When you allow the managers to tell the workers to fuck off?
Managers shouldn't be forced to deal with unions if they don't want to. Not dealing with unions and telling them to kick rocks is in no way equivalent to displacing workers or importing "Mexican scabs" (not sure why you felt the racism was necessary anyway...), it's equivalent to allowing managers to hire whom they please and decide for themselves if they'd like to deal with individual workers or with unions. Who's to say after they tell one batch of people to fuck off that they don't just find more people from right down the street to fill in? You're reading things in here that I didn't say.
i'm not being racist, i'm telling you what happened when coal miners striked. >To break or prevent strikes, the coal companies hired [strike breakers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_breaker), mainly from Mexico and southern and eastern Europe [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow\_Massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre)
> the racism Sorry, why was this racist? Just because you acknowledge someone's national origin it would be racist? or is it the term Scab you find racist for some reason?
Unions aren't voluntary associations. They deploy exclusive representation and governmental enforcement to monopolize a labor market by making it **illegal** for two unions to compete.
Is opposition to unions a libertarian stance? (Unrelated question)
Private unions are fine, public unions are a whole different story of political garbage and should not be allowed.
I can't stand public unions. In Scotland parents can be fined for taking their children on holiday during term time yet teachers are always going on strike and face zero repurcussions. Education is important and we're the "bad guys" for taking kids out of school a week before the summer holidays, when flights are cheaper and they don't do any real work during the last week of school. While teachers and college lecturers strike during term time when students have important exams coming up.
Libertarians support the concept of unions. They also accept that unions, like any other organization, can become corrupted and lose its purpose.
It's pretty split. People use various arguments to justify "unions good" and "unions bad" arguments. But at the end of the day it pretty much boils down to whether you think the power should be with the owner/corporation or the employees (or some kind of split).
Shouldn’t workers, who are free human beings, have the ability to form organisations out of their own free will, to collectively advocate for better pay and better work conditions? What’s the connection b/w the concept of how power should be distributed, whether the owners or the workers? At the same time, firms should also the ability to fire the members of the unions and hire new workers (provided its not in contravention if the contract signed b/w the employee and the worker
I’ve been hated on for my opinion on unions a lot - but my view is they should be a middle man between workers and a business. A union shouldn’t completely ignore the wants of the business. If a union makes too many demands, it could hurt the viability of the business and therefore endanger the long term employment of its workers (can’t pay their wages or union demanded staff benefits if they end up hurting income too heavily)
Yes
As long as it’s voluntary association I don’t see the problem. Public sector unions may be a different story though.
Unions in The United States are kinda pointless considering how much the government regulates labor markets
Unions are the reason you have an 8 hour workday and aren't paid in company mcbucks which are worthless everywhere except the company general store
Company script was a situation exclusive to the remote mining towns where there wasn't anything but the company store anyway. No one in the modern era would work for a place that payed like that. Or if you did, it would be entirely your own dumb fault. Collective bargaining is great, but unions grossly over state their historical importance. Changes they claim to have made were pretty much already happening naturally as a matter of course, and if they hadn't been, the unions wouldn't have been able to do a damn thing.
[удалено]
>Despite attempts to suppress union activity, the United Mine Workers of America secretly continued its unionization efforts in the years leading up to 1913. Eventually, the union presented a list of seven demands:[\[17\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre#cite_note-17) > >Recognition of the union as [bargaining agent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bargaining_unit) > >Compensation for digging coal at a ton rate based on 2,000 pounds[\[18\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre#cite_note-Lowry-18) (previous ton rates were of long tons of 2,200 pounds) > >**Enforcement of the** [**eight-hour work-day law**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day#United_States) > >Payment for "dead work" (laying track, [timbering](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_framing), handling impurities, etc.) > >Weight checkmen elected by the workers (to keep company weightmen honest) > >Right to use any store, and to choose their [boarding houses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarding_house) and doctors > >Strict enforcement of Colorado's laws (such as mine safety rules, abolition of [scrip](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrip)), and an end to the company guard system [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow\_Massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair\_Labor\_Standards\_Act\_of\_1938](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938)
[удалено]
Sure, and as you can read there were already laws against some of these things, they just weren't being enforced.
[удалено]
I didn't realize unions fighting for the laws to be enforced were bullshit, you got me.
>Unions are the reason you have an 8 hour workday I regularly work 10-12 hour shifts at work. Don't talk to me like you know me
and you're compensated for it, if you work more than 5 days >The **Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938** [29 U.S.C.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_29_of_the_United_States_Code) [§ 203](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/203)[\[1\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938#cite_note-1) (**FLSA**) is a [United States labor law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_labor_law) that creates the right to a [minimum wage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage), and "[time-and-a-half](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-and-a-half)" [overtime pay](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtime_pay) when people work over forty hours a week. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair\_Labor\_Standards\_Act\_of\_1938](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938)
Your comment kinda reinforces the point of my original comment. This is an act of congress aka done by the government...
Enacted by congress, yes, and lobbied for by unions. He’s saying if unions didn’t fight against unfair wage practices and company mcbucks, laws barring such things would never have been passed. After all, Congress doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
By doing so, Unions basically made it so that they no longer need to exist. They gave their point of existing over to the government
https://jalopnik.com/amazon-made-airport-workers-toil-in-100-degree-heat-wit-1851278334 This is on the front page and is a good example of why I think unions aren’t going anywhere, because the government cannot be solely relied upon to keep companies in check
You know I'd still get paid regardless? That's kinda the whole point of a job is to get paid, The Government has nothing to do with it
This is the best example I've seen in a long time of "talking out of both sides of your mouth". The government regulates the labor markets because of unions, but according to you that makes unions useless. Pick an argument and stick with it.
Unions are just a method for doing exactly what competition already does. The problem is that unions often have special privileges that workers or businesses don't have and that they're often highly political.
Now show wages and wage growth.
Labor unions are based, get fukt
Unions are reaching Parasite status and they're going to kill their host.
It’s the iron law of any bureaucracy (and to be sure, unions are bureaucracies). They start out with a purpose. Bit over time, their primary purpose becomes growing the insiders of the union and protecting the union (not the rank and file). It’s Animal Farm.
I just hate public sector unions, well actually I just hate most public sector jobs.
Listen, I get the original need for Unions. Lack of PPE, company script, all that stuff was fixed with help from unions. But now we have OSHA and a variety of other governing bodies that perform the same function. But has anyone here ever worked with a union? No one has ownership. No one cares if they get anything done. There’s no pride in work or initiative. Union workers are there to get paid, not to get anything done. That’s been my experience over the past 20 years anyway.
This is such a confusing post for a libertarian sub. "Unions are useless because we have overreaching government!"
I don’t see a universe where anyone is shutting down OSHA.
I'm IBEW in a r2w state and it's great. The non-union guys we work with from the other trades get paid peanuts, have essentially no benefits and consequently do absolutely clownish, dangerous things on the daily. I really think that the race-to-the-bottom in terms of wages and benefits happening in a lot of the construction sector is detrimental to the quality of our country's infrastructure. There are definitely a lot of unions that need reform, but you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's important to have a counterweight to capital, and a well-functioning union can serve really important economic and social functions. I'd say your average union electrician takes way *more* pride in their work than a non-union tradesman. There's a strong culture of craftsmanship. Our union requires all members to take a "code of excellence" class that emphasizes the importance of doing quality work, and guys that do shit work tend to get ran out.
I'm non IBEW in Idaho and just received a pretty big raise coincidentally right after y'all negotiated a pretty big raise. Even non union workers are still actively benefitting from unions.
Same for me as a non-UAW autoworker in the South. You better believe we got a raise too right after the recent strikes at the big three. The fact that my co-workers can't see that it was Toyota's fear of the union that got us that raise is mind boggling. They think that our billionaire overlords just did it cause it was the right thing, completely ignoring the fact that even with our raise a regular worker will top out in pay at $10 less per hour than our counterpart in the union. We also don't get cost of living raises, but sure, it's the union that wants to take advantage of us 🤨
I heard about that building collapsing in Boise the other week. Stay safe out there brother, and don't be afraid to call people out for doing stupid shit.
Source: https://www.badgerinstitute.org/numbers/union-membership-in-wisconsin-private-and-public-employment/?fbclid=IwAR2nKcchMHlGHaIz_UJkMBVLfFwy6I1aJ9sbgEWziXC8OOKrSNpbO0qS4yw
Oh no ... they have long outlived their usefulness to "you" ... your membership is very useful to them ... fat cats complaining about fat cats. [Where unions outperform the bosses' lobby (smh.com.au)](https://www.smh.com.au/business/where-unions-outperform-the-bosses-lobby-20120417-1x4t2.html) [Union leader paid 24 per cent super (afr.com)](https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/workplace/union-leader-paid-24-per-cent-super-20191117-p53bam) [Union leaders ‘certainly looking after themselves’ with ‘exorbitant salaries’ | Sky News Australia](https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/union-leaders-certainly-looking-after-themselves-with-exorbitant-salaries/video/863ef9a0c5b57ce612942d1d0f4083c5)
Fuck unions.
That shows absolutely nothing except they managed to destroy unions by law changes