3 ms·

People don't like public unions because they are effective unions, it has nothing to do with them being public. There are plenty of professions critical for run

People don't like public unions because they are effective unions, it has nothing to do with them being public. There are plenty of professions critical for running society. What if all trucker decided to stop working? Pretty bad, maybe even worse than if all teachers quit, but it doesn't happen because truckers don't have a strong union. If tech workers in Silicon Valley or Seattle started voting as a block with their union they would completely control the areas, but tech workers are not going to form unions.

snapplebobapple 2y ago
This is not correct, at least not for me. I don't like public unions for the 3 points this article outlines. I would counter your point about effective and say that that only appear effective (if you define effective at maximizing union member compensation) because they can abuse market power and collude with politicians to pay labor way more than would ever happen if the business they were operating in could be substituted away from by its customers. This is not effective on a society level, it's dead weight loss causing abuse of market power and it should be stopped.
- zeroCalories 2y ago
  Almost everything you described could be done by a private sector union. They're just worse at it.
  - snapplebobapple 2y ago
    No it can't be, at least not for any serious length of time. If a private union gets away with the above for any length of time it will eventually kill the company because the competing companies will outcompete it. (it could work if the company was a strong oligopoly or monopoly but the correct solution there is to break up the company, not allow the union to collect its piece of the monopoly profits at the expense of deadweight loss to society).
    - zeroCalories 2y ago
      Many unions, like the actors guild, or nurses' union aren't tied to specific companies. You see auto workers' protesting and Biden trying to appease them, but in the end it doesn't matter much because they are weak. Sure the union might end up just killing their industry, but that's no different from public unions getting crushed by resentful voters, which we've seen in cases with police unions.

snapplebobapple 2y ago

This is not correct, at least not for me. I don't like public unions for the 3 points this article outlines. I would counter your point about effective and say that that only appear effective (if you define effective at maximizing union member compensation) because they can abuse market power and collude with politicians to pay labor way more than would ever happen if the business they were operating in could be substituted away from by its customers. This is not effective on a society level, it's dead weight loss causing abuse of market power and it should be stopped.

zeroCalories 2y ago
Almost everything you described could be done by a private sector union. They're just worse at it.
- snapplebobapple 2y ago
  No it can't be, at least not for any serious length of time. If a private union gets away with the above for any length of time it will eventually kill the company because the competing companies will outcompete it. (it could work if the company was a strong oligopoly or monopoly but the correct solution there is to break up the company, not allow the union to collect its piece of the monopoly profits at the expense of deadweight loss to society).
  - zeroCalories 2y ago
    Many unions, like the actors guild, or nurses' union aren't tied to specific companies. You see auto workers' protesting and Biden trying to appease them, but in the end it doesn't matter much because they are weak. Sure the union might end up just killing their industry, but that's no different from public unions getting crushed by resentful voters, which we've seen in cases with police unions.