Unions, at least in Germany, dictate stric salary bands for all employees, existing and new-commers. You can't have new-hires making 50% more than old-timers wh

Unions, at least in Germany, dictate stric salary bands for all employees, existing and new-commers. You can't have new-hires making 50% more than old-timers who've been 10 years with the company, just because the stock market has an uptick and an increased demand for people where there's a shortage. You can bring in the new-hire at similar wages to everyone already in the company with the same experience as him, or you have to raise wages for everyone else to give him a major increase. Guess which options companies here take. Unionized companies don't grow according to the stock market but according to profits, sales and customer orders, so you never see mass hires because the stock market went up, you also don't see mass fires because the market went down. That's why there isn't a huge salary difference between a senior and a junior, at least not like in the US where seniors can make 4-8 times as much as a junior. Unionized companies here also look down on job hoppers (people who jump ship for more compensation every 2-3 years) and tend not to hire them. So yeah, from historical evidence we have so far, from my PoV, unions and crazy compensations that also grow like crazy in sync with the stock market, are mutually exclusive. Do you want uniuonized slow stable growth that lags the stock market, or do you want to make money in sync or above the stock market? Pick one.