3 ms·
0. Unions. And that implies the others: litigious, corrupted and lacking competition.
by nickpp 6y ago
0. Unions. And that implies the others: litigious, corrupted and lacking competition.
- estebank 6y agoAre you implying that there aren't unions in Europe?
- nostromo 6y agoThat's not the right question. The question is are labor unions stronger in Paris or New York; London or Chicago? It's not an obvious answer. If you just looked at pay, you'd probably come to the conclusion that unions in blue state metros in the US are much more powerful than any of their European counterparts.
- thescriptkiddie 6y agoEurope famously has no labor unions. /s
- casefields 6y ago3 of you already strawmanning that user. He didn't say they were the only reason, nor anything about Europe's unions. They are making the same point the article you 3 clicked at the top of this page: >Although the material and equipment costs are similar (within 10%) for projects in the United States and in Europe, labor costs are substantially higher in the United States as outlined above. For example, in California the average billing labor rates for qualified tunnel workers is about $70/hr and the average New York labor rate of qualified tunnel workers is at over $100/hr, whereas in Germany (one of the high labor rates countries in Europe) the comparable labor rate is about $30/hr." You add up all these inefficiencies, including Union labor, and it starts to bloat infrastructure projects. Unions can do wonderful things, but they no incentive to fix things when they're benefit. Or in the words or Upton Sinclair: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- brnt 6y agoUnions are stronger in Europe, so that does not make sense.