> Not increasing its power is not undermining it. This might be true if you were describing a situation with three parties: a company, a union, and you - affil

> Not increasing its power is not undermining it. This might be true if you were describing a situation with three parties: a company, a union, and you - affiliated with neither. But as almost all unionization takes place after people have already entered an employee/employer relationship, the neutrality has been lost; you are, by default, on the side of the employer if you are not a part of the union, and having employees not in a union does weaken the bargaining position of the union since it's relative representation that matters. > Stop changing definitions to suit your political goals. Don't forget to call the kettle black, while you're at it.