Posted on 08/22/2013 10:11:07 AM PDT by willowsdale
A front-page Wall Street Journal article published at the beginning of this week (see link below) and other news reports are calling public attention to the fact that, after many years of decline, manufacturing employment in the U.S. has modestly rebounded since the end of the Great Recession.
Unfortunately, the Journal account and others appearing in major media outlets ignore data showing that even as the total number of manufacturing jobs increased by roughly 480,000 from 2009 to 2012, the number of factory jobs held by unionized workers fell by nearly 130,000. (Our source for these figures and those in the next paragraph is the unionstats.com web site, maintained by economists Barry Hirsch and David Macpherson.)
In other words, while union-free manufacturing employment in the U.S. increased by 5.2% during the first three years of recovery from the Great Recession, unionized manufacturing employment fell by 8.1%. From 2011 to 2012 alone, unionized factory jobs fell by 3.6%, while union-free factory jobs increased by 3.4%.
By far the most plausible explanations for these data is that union-free domestic manufacturing companies are more likely to add jobs and less likely to cut jobs than unionized domestic manufacturing companies. And of course, employees of shrinking Big Labor-controlled firms have far less job security than employees of growing union-free firms.
In addition to the apparent fact that they are less likely to be laid off, union-free manufacturing employees earned an average of $24.30 in 2012, or $1.00 an hour more than the average for manufacturing employees who belong to a union. (Source: 2013 edition of Hirsch and Macpherson’s Union Membership and Earnings Data Book, published by Bloomberg and the Bureau of National Affairs.)
(Excerpt) Read more at nrtwc.org ...
A big part of the reason is that factories who hire union jag-offs who are difficult to fire are less competitive than those which do not. It is that simple.
I’d like to see more of this kind of research. I’ve worked in the health departments of union and non union automotive plants. It seems to me union plants by far have more injuries, more severe injuries, more people off work at any given time, more labor and worker’s comp litigation. The costs of course are passed down to the consumer that makes the union made products less competitive.
IMO, it has always been a myth that non-union jobs pay less than union jobs. As a non-union employer you realize to compete for workers, good workers, you must pay a wage or salary that will attract and keep them. It is the marketplace which dictate pay. Since local union workers are part of the mix, their wages are factored into the determination. In the manufacturing plants you like to believe that after you choose a new employee, have gone through a background check and physical exam that person will stay with you until retirement. I confess I have not been involved in industrial employment since the 80’s.
Lower pay, less security, AND forced union dues? Where do I sign up?
Younger folks:
In the near future, there will be more factories in the U.S.A. Union or non-union, if managers are spoiled rotten and vain in one factory, wanting subservience, lip service or expressions of certain political or social beliefs more than production, then move on to the next factory. Or start your own tiny production operation. Work around the moral bankruptcy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.