Unions bring democracy to the workplace. Democracy ensures some modicum of fairness, but is slow, inefficient, and can lead to very bad outcomes when dealing w

Unions bring democracy to the workplace. Democracy ensures some modicum of fairness, but is slow, inefficient, and can lead to very bad outcomes when dealing with highly technical questions. There's probably a place for big, large-scale political questions (who should be president, should we stay in the EU) to be decided by direct democracy, but I wouldn't want that for trade or monetary policy. The big problem I see with democracy, in general, is that it's highly susceptible to special-interest takeover. When a small group stands to gain disproportionately from a particular outcome, they will lobbby--HARD--to get that outcome. Even when doing so might be so harmful to the overall system, that it collapses, even if they get what they want. The US analog is the SEIU/AFSCME organizing so hard that the entire government of a state, like Illinois, becomes beholden to what they want. How did AB5, the TNC bill, pass, when it was overwhelmingly not supported by drivers and the electorate didn't want it, either? Teamsters pushed their agenda. Hard. Unions will make no bones about running an employer, government, or other organization absolutely into the ground in the name of advocating for their members' interests. They do not care about taxpayers, customers, or any other constituency other than themselves and their members. And when it all falls apart, they'll just go to the next state/company/etc. and run the same playbook, over and over. It's very harmful. Some things need to be outside the reach of democracy/the masses.