5 ms·

Unions are simply a balancing force to that of the management whose sole purpose is to extract as much profit from the enterprise. Yes, a lot of bad things can

Unions are simply a balancing force to that of the management whose sole purpose is to extract as much profit from the enterprise. Yes, a lot of bad things can happen when unions gain too much power. But that doesn't mean unions are necessarily evil. On the contrary, they are a necessary evil, as a balancing force of the evil of the profit incentive. The free market generally does not have the power to correct for overreaching management. In many cases the signal necessary to make a judgement is not propagated to consumers, at least not in such a way that it will cause a change in consumers purchasing decisions. This is where unions are necessary to correct against overbearing and unrealistic management. Society is stronger, and the economy is stronger, when the "wealth" of a nation is well distributed among everyone. Wealth here being everything from health, leisure time, assurances against bodily injury, etc. Unions are but one tool to ensure this equitable distribution.

philwelch 14y ago
> Society is stronger, and the economy is stronger, when the "wealth" of a nation is well distributed among everyone. Wealth here being everything from health, leisure time, assurances against bodily injury, etc. Unions are but one tool to ensure this equitable distribution. I'll agree with that, but I think regulation and Big Government™ are a better solution and unions have outlived their usefulness. You can tell because most people who advocate for unions just rest on past glories.
- elviejo 14y ago
  Freelancers union is a new phenomena... And the fact that it is formed by independent workers.. tells you about the need for this associations.
- hackinthebochs 14y ago
  I can agree with your point. Government perhaps is smarter and better equipped to deal with these types of issues than it was in the past when unions were necessary. The follow up question to this is: how did Government become smarter about labor issues? Was it unions that brought these issues to mainstream attention? If we do away unions, who could adequately fill this role? Unions are special because they have direct access to information that is generally lost to anyone outside of the company's walls. Any entity that filled the role of watchdog would need access to this information.
yummyfajitas 14y ago
The free market generally does not have the power to correct for overreaching management. Can you explain this claim? Specifically, why "overreaching management" is bad for consumers, and why the market can't correct for it?
- hackinthebochs 14y ago
  I don't personally believe that overreaching management is necessarily bad for consumers. I was just trying to preempt what seemed to be a logical reply given philwelch's previous comments. As to why the market won't necessarily correct for it, is because many times overreaching management is effective (at least in the short term). Degrade working conditions to cut costs and the consumer benefits. The information about how these lower prices were brought to the consumer is usually lost in the process. That signal simply doesn't reach all interested parties, and thus they aren't able to adjust their behavior in response. Some situations it can work, for example a business where customer service is a large part of the experience. The signal of overreaching management does eventually filter down to the consumer.
  - anamax 14y ago
    > That signal simply doesn't reach all interested parties, Sure it does. I, the customer, see both the price and the service. If I'm willing to pay more for more service, I can do so. And, this signal also reaches the employees as well. If you don't like it, go elsewhere. If you're right about how valuable your service is, customers will make the same choice. If you're wrong....
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - hackinthebochs 14y ago
      What about products that have no aspect of customer service, say canned tuna? The point is that there are classes of products with no meaningful level of customer service to the final consumer. Or, any consideration of service is trumped by lower cost. In both of these cases the market will not correct for overbearing management.
brc 14y ago
>balancing force of the evil of the profit incentive. Seriously, you need to work on your language and mindset if you think profit is evil. Profit is just a surplus of outputs for inputs given. It's what makes people get out of bed in the morning. It is most definitely not evil.
- hackinthebochs 14y ago
  Oh come on. I was hoping it was clear that I was using the word "evil" as generic label for the negative side of any dichotomy. I don't personally believe in actual evil anyways (does anyone?).
anamax 14y ago
> Unions are simply a balancing force to that of the management whose sole purpose is to extract as much profit from the enterprise. You say "profit" like it's a bad thing. It's not, it's what funds new good things. And, reducing costs is a good thing. It produces "more". BTW - Management's goal is to extract as much profit for managers, not for the enterprise. One big problem with the corporate model is that no one has a long term interest. No one at GM ever got fired for agreeing to the contracts that broke the company. Instead, folks did get fired for not giving in.
- hackinthebochs 14y ago
  Profit is "evil" here because it creates incentives for all sorts of bad things. This is what necessitates a balancing force.
  - anamax 14y ago
    > Profit is "evil" here because it creates incentives for all sorts of bad things. This is what necessitates a balancing force. Even if that's true, unions aren't a balancing force to the "incentives for all sorts of bad things". The only role that unions will play here is in trying to get their cut. Actually, that's wrong. Unions will often actively help commit said "bad things" because they'll benefit. For example, unions are often quite protectionist.
    - hackinthebochs 14y ago
      Of course there are many dimensions here. In some dimensions unions are "evil", in some they are "good". Everyone always loves to simplify things down to their pet ideology.
      - anamax 14y ago
        > Of course there are many dimensions here. In some dimensions unions are "evil", in some they are "good". The question isn't whether unions are good or evil, it's whether they're actually a counter to a specific evil that companies might commit. Since that evil produces more money for the company, you need an example where a union did something to reduce a company's profit other than by trying to increase the union's cut. Unions are not new, so if you're going to suggest that they're useful for doing something, you should have actual examples of them doing said something.

philwelch 14y ago

> Society is stronger, and the economy is stronger, when the "wealth" of a nation is well distributed among everyone. Wealth here being everything from health, leisure time, assurances against bodily injury, etc. Unions are but one tool to ensure this equitable distribution. I'll agree with that, but I think regulation and Big Government™ are a better solution and unions have outlived their usefulness. You can tell because most people who advocate for unions just rest on past glories.

elviejo 14y ago
Freelancers union is a new phenomena... And the fact that it is formed by independent workers.. tells you about the need for this associations.
hackinthebochs 14y ago
I can agree with your point. Government perhaps is smarter and better equipped to deal with these types of issues than it was in the past when unions were necessary. The follow up question to this is: how did Government become smarter about labor issues? Was it unions that brought these issues to mainstream attention? If we do away unions, who could adequately fill this role? Unions are special because they have direct access to information that is generally lost to anyone outside of the company's walls. Any entity that filled the role of watchdog would need access to this information.

yummyfajitas 14y ago

The free market generally does not have the power to correct for overreaching management. Can you explain this claim? Specifically, why "overreaching management" is bad for consumers, and why the market can't correct for it?

hackinthebochs 14y ago
I don't personally believe that overreaching management is necessarily bad for consumers. I was just trying to preempt what seemed to be a logical reply given philwelch's previous comments. As to why the market won't necessarily correct for it, is because many times overreaching management is effective (at least in the short term). Degrade working conditions to cut costs and the consumer benefits. The information about how these lower prices were brought to the consumer is usually lost in the process. That signal simply doesn't reach all interested parties, and thus they aren't able to adjust their behavior in response. Some situations it can work, for example a business where customer service is a large part of the experience. The signal of overreaching management does eventually filter down to the consumer.
- anamax 14y ago
  > That signal simply doesn't reach all interested parties, Sure it does. I, the customer, see both the price and the service. If I'm willing to pay more for more service, I can do so. And, this signal also reaches the employees as well. If you don't like it, go elsewhere. If you're right about how valuable your service is, customers will make the same choice. If you're wrong....
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - hackinthebochs 14y ago
    What about products that have no aspect of customer service, say canned tuna? The point is that there are classes of products with no meaningful level of customer service to the final consumer. Or, any consideration of service is trumped by lower cost. In both of these cases the market will not correct for overbearing management.

brc 14y ago

>balancing force of the evil of the profit incentive. Seriously, you need to work on your language and mindset if you think profit is evil. Profit is just a surplus of outputs for inputs given. It's what makes people get out of bed in the morning. It is most definitely not evil.

hackinthebochs 14y ago
Oh come on. I was hoping it was clear that I was using the word "evil" as generic label for the negative side of any dichotomy. I don't personally believe in actual evil anyways (does anyone?).

anamax 14y ago

> Unions are simply a balancing force to that of the management whose sole purpose is to extract as much profit from the enterprise. You say "profit" like it's a bad thing. It's not, it's what funds new good things. And, reducing costs is a good thing. It produces "more". BTW - Management's goal is to extract as much profit for managers, not for the enterprise. One big problem with the corporate model is that no one has a long term interest. No one at GM ever got fired for agreeing to the contracts that broke the company. Instead, folks did get fired for not giving in.

hackinthebochs 14y ago
Profit is "evil" here because it creates incentives for all sorts of bad things. This is what necessitates a balancing force.
- anamax 14y ago
  > Profit is "evil" here because it creates incentives for all sorts of bad things. This is what necessitates a balancing force. Even if that's true, unions aren't a balancing force to the "incentives for all sorts of bad things". The only role that unions will play here is in trying to get their cut. Actually, that's wrong. Unions will often actively help commit said "bad things" because they'll benefit. For example, unions are often quite protectionist.
  - hackinthebochs 14y ago
    Of course there are many dimensions here. In some dimensions unions are "evil", in some they are "good". Everyone always loves to simplify things down to their pet ideology.
    - anamax 14y ago
      > Of course there are many dimensions here. In some dimensions unions are "evil", in some they are "good". The question isn't whether unions are good or evil, it's whether they're actually a counter to a specific evil that companies might commit. Since that evil produces more money for the company, you need an example where a union did something to reduce a company's profit other than by trying to increase the union's cut. Unions are not new, so if you're going to suggest that they're useful for doing something, you should have actual examples of them doing said something.