2 ms·

The problem is there already is a single "mob of power", and that’s the employer. If your employer decides it’s anti-immigrant, that’s bad for you. Unions are

• renewiltord 6y ago
  This part is true. The employer does have more power than most employees. However, the employer isn't permitted the kind of cross-company monopsony that unions are permitted to form. Employers would like to try this and have done so (Apple+Google famous anti-poach being an example). Anti-poaching agreements are illegal and when they take place they've been slapped down. However, unions have no such restriction. A Google union would affiliate itself with a Facebook union and those with a Kickstarter union and those with a Random Startup union and before you know it you can't go anywhere without being subject to the wisdom common to Google+Facebook. This makes sense to the union: increased power comes with increased size. If my employer decides they're anti-immigrant I will go elsewhere and be paid just as well. They will lose.
  • Apocryphon 6y ago
    > However, the employer isn't permitted the kind of cross-company monopsony that unions are permitted to form. Sure they are. That's just called industry practice. Multiple corporations can decide that certain policies towards workers all favor them, even without a formalized agreement (clandestine or not). They can even all choose to enshrine these policies through lobbying groups and PACs.