4 ms·

For one example see culinary union and Bernie Sanders primaries in Nevada. [1] [1] https://theintercept.com/2020/02/23/culinary-workers-bucked-their-leadership

For one example see culinary union and Bernie Sanders primaries in Nevada. [1] [1] https://theintercept.com/2020/02/23/culinary-workers-bucked-their-leadership-by-backing-bernie-sanders-in-nevada-heres-what-they-knew/ https://theintercept.com/2020/02/23/culinary-workers-bucked-... I also know few instances where worker unions negotiated better benefits, wages for existing members while letting employer hire new employees at lower wages as a compromise.

tablespoon 6y ago
Even your own link has this: > That is probably why other union leaders, like the SEIU’s Mary Kay Henry and Association of Flight Attendants-CWA’s Sara Nelson, support Medicare for All. The advocacy group Labor for Single Payer lists 21 unions who support it. But the controversy lingers, kept alive in part by politicians who oppose Medicare For All. It's not always very clear whether one healthcare plan would be better than another, especially when the details haven't actually been worked out for the replacement. It sounds like the Culinary Workers Union has built an impressive healthcare system, and wants to be sure their members don't have their healthcare downgraded under a new plan. Increased wages are much more clear cut. It's not like union employees making $30/hr are going to get their wages reset to the minimum because that was increased to $15/hr. > I also know few instances where worker unions negotiated better benefits, wages for existing members while letting employer hire new employees at lower wages as a compromise. And that's likely because those unions were in weak negotiating positions, not because (like you were originally proposing) they wanted to stand in the way of better worker benefits to make themselves more attractive in comparison. IIRC, those lower-paid new hires are also represented by the same union.

tablespoon 6y ago

Even your own link has this: > That is probably why other union leaders, like the SEIU’s Mary Kay Henry and Association of Flight Attendants-CWA’s Sara Nelson, support Medicare for All. The advocacy group Labor for Single Payer lists 21 unions who support it. But the controversy lingers, kept alive in part by politicians who oppose Medicare For All. It's not always very clear whether one healthcare plan would be better than another, especially when the details haven't actually been worked out for the replacement. It sounds like the Culinary Workers Union has built an impressive healthcare system, and wants to be sure their members don't have their healthcare downgraded under a new plan. Increased wages are much more clear cut. It's not like union employees making $30/hr are going to get their wages reset to the minimum because that was increased to $15/hr. > I also know few instances where worker unions negotiated better benefits, wages for existing members while letting employer hire new employees at lower wages as a compromise. And that's likely because those unions were in weak negotiating positions, not because (like you were originally proposing) they wanted to stand in the way of better worker benefits to make themselves more attractive in comparison. IIRC, those lower-paid new hires are also represented by the same union.