5 ms·

Or when the union leadership becomes unreasonable.

by toasterlovin 7y ago

Ididntdothis 7y ago
From what I have seen it’s mostly management that gets greedy first.
- bluGill 7y ago
  Who was first doesn't change the fact that unions are sometimes unreasonable. Though I have to say most companies I've seen with evil unions have management that deserves the worst a union can do. I've seen cases of good management with bad unions harming everybody (except the union leaders), but they are generally rare.
  - K0SM0S 7y ago
    You guys should come see how it's done in France, where it's appaling to witness all the bad faith and disingenuosity from both sides — because the regulation is so tight that both sides feel righteous and untouchable, so to speak. The truth is that ~7% of French workers were unionized last I checked — a dysmal failure for these associations, an all-time low that's been true for decades. And yet they take the right to block the whole country on issue X or Y because, well, they're official unions protected by the law. They are systemically funded by regulation, like social security or any other de facto 'tax'. I would generally claim that in very different ways, the French and Americans are just as bad at unions — totally fails the point and disturbs (destroys, even) much more than it creates. I've heard great things about the German approach, but I can't substantiate first-hand. It's portrayed as a great synergy between management and unions to increase the value of the company as a whole while redistributing wealth (whether money, time, privileges...) in a fair manner. It's no rocket science either to treat everyone well, which tells you how uncooperative human beings can become when circle-jerking too hard (we are biologically, socially very protective of "our own" and very hostile to "others", the question being where each of us puts the limit).
coredog64 7y ago
Mentioned this before, but I would posit that US law essentially requires a minimally effective union to have an adversarial relationship with the company. Every member has to get equal protection, and unfortunately, not every member deserves it. (Not a knock on unions — every large organization has its share of lackwits)

Or when the union leadership becomes unreasonable.

Ididntdothis 7y ago

From what I have seen it’s mostly management that gets greedy first.

bluGill 7y ago
Who was first doesn't change the fact that unions are sometimes unreasonable. Though I have to say most companies I've seen with evil unions have management that deserves the worst a union can do. I've seen cases of good management with bad unions harming everybody (except the union leaders), but they are generally rare.
- K0SM0S 7y ago
  You guys should come see how it's done in France, where it's appaling to witness all the bad faith and disingenuosity from both sides — because the regulation is so tight that both sides feel righteous and untouchable, so to speak. The truth is that ~7% of French workers were unionized last I checked — a dysmal failure for these associations, an all-time low that's been true for decades. And yet they take the right to block the whole country on issue X or Y because, well, they're official unions protected by the law. They are systemically funded by regulation, like social security or any other de facto 'tax'. I would generally claim that in very different ways, the French and Americans are just as bad at unions — totally fails the point and disturbs (destroys, even) much more than it creates. I've heard great things about the German approach, but I can't substantiate first-hand. It's portrayed as a great synergy between management and unions to increase the value of the company as a whole while redistributing wealth (whether money, time, privileges...) in a fair manner. It's no rocket science either to treat everyone well, which tells you how uncooperative human beings can become when circle-jerking too hard (we are biologically, socially very protective of "our own" and very hostile to "others", the question being where each of us puts the limit).

coredog64 7y ago

Mentioned this before, but I would posit that US law essentially requires a minimally effective union to have an adversarial relationship with the company. Every member has to get equal protection, and unfortunately, not every member deserves it. (Not a knock on unions — every large organization has its share of lackwits)