5 ms·

It's close to impossible to make a justified, informed decision when both sides are hiding behind pompous phrases and heavily standardized press releases. But

It's close to impossible to make a justified, informed decision when both sides are hiding behind pompous phrases and heavily standardized press releases. But in absence of other information my uneducated sympathy would tilt a bit towards the company and away from the union for one simple reason: many unions are essentially monopolies. Yes, we all know a good union is a good thing and it can be beneficial for both the corporation and the workers. But what if a union happens to be "bad" it seems like the corporation has very little leverage. We do have all sorts of laws and regulations preventing formation of large monopolies in corporate world. Do we have anything to prevent a de facto monopolization of workforce by a union?

jschwartzi 7y ago
> We do have all sorts of laws and regulations preventing formation of large monopolies in corporate world. Do we have anything to prevent a de facto monopolization of workforce by a union? It's called "right-to-work" law. Some states have it and some states don't. But it prevents a union from requiring you to join as a condition of working for a company.
- charwalker 7y ago
  And in some cases translates to the ability to fire you same day with no reason given. Perk is you can do the same, quit with no reason or notice. The imbalance seems clear.
TremendousJudge 7y ago
Oh wow, yeah, won't anybody think of the poor corporations
- EpicEng 7y ago
  Without those evil coprorations your union members are out of a job, so yes, we should probably at least consider that there are two sides to this.
WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
> it seems like the corporation has very little leverage Create a less crooked union...?
excursionist 7y ago
What's the difference between 'monopolization of workforce' by a union, vs by a corporation? A union should be democratic, but if the workforce is split into many smaller unions it loses negotiating power.
- cperciva 7y ago
  There wouldn't be a difference, but that's not the case here. Workers in the auto sector have several different employers to choose from. In terms of equalizing bargaining power, unions make sense in a few narrow contexts -- say, single-employer mining towns -- but far less in cities where workers have many options open to them.
  - excursionist 7y ago
    'Choosing' a union or whether to be part of one is not any harder than 'choosing' an employer.
  - pytester 7y ago
    In terms of equalizing bargaining power, not having unions maybe makes sense if there 3,000 highly competitive companies in the auto sector instead of only three.

jschwartzi 7y ago

> We do have all sorts of laws and regulations preventing formation of large monopolies in corporate world. Do we have anything to prevent a de facto monopolization of workforce by a union? It's called "right-to-work" law. Some states have it and some states don't. But it prevents a union from requiring you to join as a condition of working for a company.

charwalker 7y ago
And in some cases translates to the ability to fire you same day with no reason given. Perk is you can do the same, quit with no reason or notice. The imbalance seems clear.

TremendousJudge 7y ago

Oh wow, yeah, won't anybody think of the poor corporations

EpicEng 7y ago
Without those evil coprorations your union members are out of a job, so yes, we should probably at least consider that there are two sides to this.

WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago

> it seems like the corporation has very little leverage Create a less crooked union...?

excursionist 7y ago

What's the difference between 'monopolization of workforce' by a union, vs by a corporation? A union should be democratic, but if the workforce is split into many smaller unions it loses negotiating power.

cperciva 7y ago
There wouldn't be a difference, but that's not the case here. Workers in the auto sector have several different employers to choose from. In terms of equalizing bargaining power, unions make sense in a few narrow contexts -- say, single-employer mining towns -- but far less in cities where workers have many options open to them.
- excursionist 7y ago
  'Choosing' a union or whether to be part of one is not any harder than 'choosing' an employer.
- pytester 7y ago
  In terms of equalizing bargaining power, not having unions maybe makes sense if there 3,000 highly competitive companies in the auto sector instead of only three.