You misunderstand grad school. Typically you and your PI will be the only people with a given specialization at a given school. You will mostly be competing for

You misunderstand grad school. Typically you and your PI will be the only people with a given specialization at a given school. You will mostly be competing for grants with your colleagues from other schools. Even students under the same PI will often have focuses so different as to rule out direct competition. Additionally "The purpose of graduate school is to put(out) compete your peers." is not /the point/ of grad school at all. You can't 'win' academia, you survive it long enough to pursue your research interest. Moreover, the 'competition' for grants is more like a lottery than anything else for reasons too complex to get into here. "What this will likely lead to IMO is more “equity” among the less capable (grants, funding)" Putting aside your assertion that "equity" is bad, grants are not decided by people that know or care if the applicant is in a union. "which will reduce the opportunity for meritocracy and more capable" Not all games are zero-sum and 'merit' based, I'd recommend that you not universalize this outlook.