5 ms·

Unions were great at stifling innovation and destroying some of our former industries such as Steel and Automotive - see what's left of former very wealthy Detr

Unions were great at stifling innovation and destroying some of our former industries such as Steel and Automotive - see what's left of former very wealthy Detroit. The classic example is the unions not allowing the Toyota Lean Production system in, as then you would need fewer workers. So in not allowing innovation, the unions were key factors in destroying entire industries which have now been built elsewhere. If this were to happen to software etc, it will just destroy innovation here and the other freer parts of the world will take the work.

peisistratos 8y ago
> destroying some of our former industries such as Steel and Automotive - see what's left of former very wealthy Detroit And what destroyed the textile mills of North and South Carolina, which were barely organized at all? They were and still are the states with the lowest unionization rates in the country. The difference is Michigan union activists like Larry Page's grandfather sent his son to college, and then his son writes a search engine while doing his doctorate. Meanwhile, the profits of Carolina textile mills went elsewhere, and the people in those towns are worse off than ever.
KoenDG 8y ago
Plenty of countries have unions and their industries have no such problems. Not saying those things you describe didn't happen. However, one should wonder why almost the entire rest of the world manages to do this just fine.
jshen 8y ago
It’s funny that you consider China freer than America. It shows that what you mean by freedom isn’t really freedom.
- gruez 8y ago
  Did GP ninja edit his post? I see no mention of china in his post.
  - jshen 8y ago
    What “freer parts of the world” is he talking about when it comes to stealing industries?
- darawk 8y ago
  Where did he say that? Was there an edit?
  - jshen 8y ago
    Which parts of the world do you think he’s talking about that are stealing industries from the US?
    - darawk 8y ago
      Did he say anything about stealing industries?
      - jshen 8y ago
        He said take, which doesn’t change my argument in any way.
        darawk 8y ago
        Except that you can take something when someone else gives it up, by say, not innovating. Taking in that sense is very much not stealing.
        jshen 8y ago
        That’s fair. But the countries he’s talking about aren’t freer by any reasonable definition of freedom. Edit: and the countries he’s talking about didn’t take manufacturing by being more innovative, they did it through cheap brutal labor practices and environmental destruction of their ecosystems.
        gibsonf1 8y ago
        My point is simply that places that embrace innovation will outperform places that don't. The Unions in the US do not embrace innovation. Look at what the Teacher's union in California has done to education here. If the US did not have the Unions destroy innovation in the car industry, perhaps the US would have the best and most reliable cars in the world. Japan embraced innovation as part of the DNA of how they work, and they make incredibly good cars. The question to ask is: who is the customer of the Union in the US? There is a conflict of interest between the Union in the US and the customers of the products created by unionized companies. In Japan, the focus is on the customer and creating the best product. In the US, the focus is on being in the Union hierarchy, "saving jobs", getting money for the Union, etc. It has nothing to do with making great cars. The construction Union in New York destroyed new modular appraoches to building in the late 60's (I worked for the architect who tried to bring that innovation in). Even today, if you want to bring modules not build in NYC in to town, it won't happen. There is a conflict of interest between the union and the construction companies' customers. This is quite apparent in California where the Teacher's union is in a conflict of interest with the students being taught, which is why the Union has destroyed the product of public education consistently for decades.
Avshalom 8y ago
On the other hand Toyota Japan has been union since the 50s
- nickthemagicman 8y ago
  True some of the best cars ever made.
smt88 8y ago
If sounds like what you're arguing is that the cost of innovation can be partly measured in human suffering. I disagree -- there are innovative, unionized companies (someone else mentioned Toyota). But even if I did agree that worker rights and wellbeing decrease innovation, then it sounds like a worthwhile tradeoff.
dv_dt 8y ago
See I sort of think historically, US unions were reactions to strongly abusive management at some point in company history. After they become entrenched, I agree that worker management relations can end up confrontational, and likely less efficient. But it's a two way relationship at the root there. But this isn't a forgone conclusion, for example worker relations seem to work fine in general in Germany which has actually institutionalized worker representation at a fairly high level in corporations.
elchief 8y ago
Ya, look how they destroyed the steel industry in Germany. Oh wait, it's thriving 1950 = 1000 thousand tonnes, 2018 = 4000 thousand tonnes
- masonic 8y ago
  1950 still faced massive WW2 damage and limited transport for materials. I would have expected a much bigger jump.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Unions were great at stifling innovation and destroying some of our former industries such as Steel and Automotive The local manifestations of those industries were destroyed by globalization (which unions fought tooth and nail), not unions. Those industries simply weren't where America's comparative advantage was in a globalized marketplace. > The classic example is the unions not allowing the Toyota Lean Production system in, The UAW did, in fact, let TPS in—not some loose copy, but the actual thing itself—at NUMMI. GM had trouble copying the parts some of its leadership wanted of TPS for its own internal use, but those included massive resistance from their own internal managers as well as labor. And it probably wouldn't have worked for GM because of path dependence; TPS is a system relying on a substantial degree of mutual trust between labor and management, but while a new relationship can start with a clean slate, a strong established history is hard to erase.
ykevinator 8y ago
The golden age of unions brought profits to companies and home ownership to single income families. There has to be balance it else we devolve to a two class society like Saudi Arabia.
prolikewh0a 8y ago
Innovation doesn't come before the lives of the people who make the product in the first place. Why is it ok to blame the workers who were trying improve their lives when it was the greedy Capitalist who moved it elsewhere?

peisistratos 8y ago

> destroying some of our former industries such as Steel and Automotive - see what's left of former very wealthy Detroit And what destroyed the textile mills of North and South Carolina, which were barely organized at all? They were and still are the states with the lowest unionization rates in the country. The difference is Michigan union activists like Larry Page's grandfather sent his son to college, and then his son writes a search engine while doing his doctorate. Meanwhile, the profits of Carolina textile mills went elsewhere, and the people in those towns are worse off than ever.

KoenDG 8y ago

Plenty of countries have unions and their industries have no such problems. Not saying those things you describe didn't happen. However, one should wonder why almost the entire rest of the world manages to do this just fine.

jshen 8y ago

It’s funny that you consider China freer than America. It shows that what you mean by freedom isn’t really freedom.

gruez 8y ago
Did GP ninja edit his post? I see no mention of china in his post.
- jshen 8y ago
  What “freer parts of the world” is he talking about when it comes to stealing industries?
darawk 8y ago
Where did he say that? Was there an edit?
- jshen 8y ago
  Which parts of the world do you think he’s talking about that are stealing industries from the US?
  - darawk 8y ago
    Did he say anything about stealing industries?
    - jshen 8y ago
      He said take, which doesn’t change my argument in any way.
      - darawk 8y ago
        Except that you can take something when someone else gives it up, by say, not innovating. Taking in that sense is very much not stealing.
        jshen 8y ago
        That’s fair. But the countries he’s talking about aren’t freer by any reasonable definition of freedom. Edit: and the countries he’s talking about didn’t take manufacturing by being more innovative, they did it through cheap brutal labor practices and environmental destruction of their ecosystems.
        gibsonf1 8y ago
        My point is simply that places that embrace innovation will outperform places that don't. The Unions in the US do not embrace innovation. Look at what the Teacher's union in California has done to education here. If the US did not have the Unions destroy innovation in the car industry, perhaps the US would have the best and most reliable cars in the world. Japan embraced innovation as part of the DNA of how they work, and they make incredibly good cars. The question to ask is: who is the customer of the Union in the US? There is a conflict of interest between the Union in the US and the customers of the products created by unionized companies. In Japan, the focus is on the customer and creating the best product. In the US, the focus is on being in the Union hierarchy, "saving jobs", getting money for the Union, etc. It has nothing to do with making great cars. The construction Union in New York destroyed new modular appraoches to building in the late 60's (I worked for the architect who tried to bring that innovation in). Even today, if you want to bring modules not build in NYC in to town, it won't happen. There is a conflict of interest between the union and the construction companies' customers. This is quite apparent in California where the Teacher's union is in a conflict of interest with the students being taught, which is why the Union has destroyed the product of public education consistently for decades.

Avshalom 8y ago

On the other hand Toyota Japan has been union since the 50s

nickthemagicman 8y ago
True some of the best cars ever made.

smt88 8y ago

If sounds like what you're arguing is that the cost of innovation can be partly measured in human suffering. I disagree -- there are innovative, unionized companies (someone else mentioned Toyota). But even if I did agree that worker rights and wellbeing decrease innovation, then it sounds like a worthwhile tradeoff.

dv_dt 8y ago

See I sort of think historically, US unions were reactions to strongly abusive management at some point in company history. After they become entrenched, I agree that worker management relations can end up confrontational, and likely less efficient. But it's a two way relationship at the root there. But this isn't a forgone conclusion, for example worker relations seem to work fine in general in Germany which has actually institutionalized worker representation at a fairly high level in corporations.

elchief 8y ago

Ya, look how they destroyed the steel industry in Germany. Oh wait, it's thriving 1950 = 1000 thousand tonnes, 2018 = 4000 thousand tonnes

masonic 8y ago
1950 still faced massive WW2 damage and limited transport for materials. I would have expected a much bigger jump.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Unions were great at stifling innovation and destroying some of our former industries such as Steel and Automotive The local manifestations of those industries were destroyed by globalization (which unions fought tooth and nail), not unions. Those industries simply weren't where America's comparative advantage was in a globalized marketplace. > The classic example is the unions not allowing the Toyota Lean Production system in, The UAW did, in fact, let TPS in—not some loose copy, but the actual thing itself—at NUMMI. GM had trouble copying the parts some of its leadership wanted of TPS for its own internal use, but those included massive resistance from their own internal managers as well as labor. And it probably wouldn't have worked for GM because of path dependence; TPS is a system relying on a substantial degree of mutual trust between labor and management, but while a new relationship can start with a clean slate, a strong established history is hard to erase.

ykevinator 8y ago

The golden age of unions brought profits to companies and home ownership to single income families. There has to be balance it else we devolve to a two class society like Saudi Arabia.

prolikewh0a 8y ago

Innovation doesn't come before the lives of the people who make the product in the first place. Why is it ok to blame the workers who were trying improve their lives when it was the greedy Capitalist who moved it elsewhere?