3 ms·
IF your company thinks spending $X on keeping you from unionizing is worth it then the benefit to you is at least ($X+1)/$num_workers to unionize.
by phone8675309 6y ago
IF your company thinks spending $X on keeping you from unionizing is worth it then the benefit to you is at least ($X+1)/$num_workers to unionize.
- chasd00 6y agodo you have any idea how big the num_workers number is? I'd wager for the average employee the benefit will be neagative, as in paycheck - union dues. The real benefit goes to the union bosses as num_workers * union_dues.
- bjoli 6y agoNow, I am not very up to date on statistics, but unionised workers have traditionally earned about 10% more than non-uniomized ones in the US since at least the 80s. The article mentions 11%, which seems in line with what I know since before. I doubt any union would charge anywhere near that much.
- aidenn0 6y agoAmazon's own literature says "almost $500" in dues[1]. If they get a 10% pay increase, then everyone making more than $5k comes out ahead. Everyone making $10k or more comes out more ahead than the union. The union bosses probably come out the most ahead because that $500 * (a lot of workers) goes to (a small number of union management types). It's hopefully obvious that the union makes it better for at least the lower 50% of performers. It seems likely to me that it makes things better for more like the bottom 90% of performers or more. A lot of anti-union literature is based upon the fact that most people think they are above average. 1: https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/ https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/
- phone8675309 6y ago$500 in dues per year is around $20 per paycheck if you're paid twice a month or every two weeks. The increase in benefits and working conditions might well be worth that, depending on the job.