4 ms·
Aside from the philosophical objections to this model, think about the practical issues that arise, specifically regarding overhead. Unions are notorious for ha
by 1stcity3rdcoast 8y ago
Aside from the philosophical objections to this model, think about the practical issues that arise, specifically regarding overhead. Unions are notorious for having well-paid administrative staff and leadership, and that does not scale with three or four separate unions. You end up with a net drain even if you were able to eke out some slight pay advantage.
- Apocryphon 8y ago> Unions are notorious for having well-paid administrative staff and leadership Couldn't you say the same about corporations?
- mamon 8y agoCorporations are spending their own money, unions are spending someone else's. That's the main difference. To be clear what I mean: At least in my country it is a legal requirement for the corporation to pay salaries of union leaders and staff - few FTEs per union.
- ilikehurdles 8y agoCorporations are spending someone else’s money. They aren’t a mint. That is in no way different. A corporation is accountable to its owners, and a union is accountable to its owners. A corporation usually has fewer owners than a union, or at least can ignore most owners who aren’t on the board; whereas union leadership can be changed by its members, the workers.
- my_username_is_ 8y agoBut if the unions weren't as big then they wouldn't need as many administrators, would they?
- br3n7 8y agoYou are holding unions to a standard that corporations can't achieve.