3 ms·

the power of a union is the ability of its workers to withhold labor. this would make unions ineffective and I'm not sure what the upside is other than an avers

the power of a union is the ability of its workers to withhold labor. this would make unions ineffective and I'm not sure what the upside is other than an aversion to monopolies.

AmericanChopper 8y ago
The actual true power of unions is to restrict entry to the trade. A union that is adversarial to employers may achieve some insignificant pay increases. But the only truly successful unions when it comes to improving pay and working conditions have exclusively done so through limiting entry to the profession, think the AMA, ALPA, Bar Associations.
- icelancer 8y ago
  Professional sports unions are also very good examples of this as well.
- femiagbabiaka 8y ago
  I appreciate that you believe that, but that's simply not based in any historical fact. The height of the AFL, IWW, etc. in terms of power was when their power to strike, especially wildcat strike, was the highest. At that time unions had more twice the membership amongst working people than they do now. Hardly a sign of unions winning because they keep workers out (racism aside).
  - AmericanChopper 8y ago
    You’re confusing a nebulous idea of political influence with real outcomes. Strikes have been used to resolve labor disputes, but if your goal is long term and meanful improvement to working conditions and remuneration, then the only times unions have ever achieved that is by restricting access to the profession. Salaries are determined by market forces, political influence will never be able to exert much pressure on the equilibrium. The only time unions have truly succeeded in this is by limiting labor supply over the long term.
    - femiagbabiaka 8y ago
      Again, just not true. > Strikes have been used to resolve labor disputes, but if your goal is long term and meanful improvement to working conditions and remuneration, then the only times unions have ever achieved that is by restricting access to the profession. Collective bargaining is how unions achieve long term and meaningful improvement to working conditions and renumeration. > Salaries are determined by market forces, political influence will never be able to exert much pressure on the equilibrium. This is just demonstrably untrue -- we've been in a bull market for almost a decade. Worker pay -- in contrast to company profits -- hasn't even kept up with inflation. Something is missing. > The only time unions have truly succeeded in this is by limiting labor supply over the long term. Do you have any citations for this? Any data?

the power of a union is the ability of its workers to withhold labor. this would make unions ineffective and I'm not sure what the upside is other than an aversion to monopolies.

AmericanChopper 8y ago

The actual true power of unions is to restrict entry to the trade. A union that is adversarial to employers may achieve some insignificant pay increases. But the only truly successful unions when it comes to improving pay and working conditions have exclusively done so through limiting entry to the profession, think the AMA, ALPA, Bar Associations.

icelancer 8y ago
Professional sports unions are also very good examples of this as well.
femiagbabiaka 8y ago
I appreciate that you believe that, but that's simply not based in any historical fact. The height of the AFL, IWW, etc. in terms of power was when their power to strike, especially wildcat strike, was the highest. At that time unions had more twice the membership amongst working people than they do now. Hardly a sign of unions winning because they keep workers out (racism aside).
- AmericanChopper 8y ago
  You’re confusing a nebulous idea of political influence with real outcomes. Strikes have been used to resolve labor disputes, but if your goal is long term and meanful improvement to working conditions and remuneration, then the only times unions have ever achieved that is by restricting access to the profession. Salaries are determined by market forces, political influence will never be able to exert much pressure on the equilibrium. The only time unions have truly succeeded in this is by limiting labor supply over the long term.
  - femiagbabiaka 8y ago
    Again, just not true. > Strikes have been used to resolve labor disputes, but if your goal is long term and meanful improvement to working conditions and remuneration, then the only times unions have ever achieved that is by restricting access to the profession. Collective bargaining is how unions achieve long term and meaningful improvement to working conditions and renumeration. > Salaries are determined by market forces, political influence will never be able to exert much pressure on the equilibrium. This is just demonstrably untrue -- we've been in a bull market for almost a decade. Worker pay -- in contrast to company profits -- hasn't even kept up with inflation. Something is missing. > The only time unions have truly succeeded in this is by limiting labor supply over the long term. Do you have any citations for this? Any data?