Replies

I totally disagree about collective bargaining breaking the entire concept of free markets.

The only way a worker has any leverage over an employer is through collective bargaining; without it, each worker is totally at the mercy of the employer. Why do you businesses went through such an effort to "union bust" during the early part of the 20th century? Obviously because collective bargaining levels the playing field--businesses have lost the advantage it once had over individuals because of collective bargaining. This is especially true in traditionally "blue collar" positions, since labor there, as a general rule, is much more plentiful than "white collar" positions.

Collective bargaining is the only way the worker can negotiate on even footing with ownership. It furthers the market, and that's a good thing. If you want to discuss politics of most labor unions, that's an entirely different subject, but unions have done a lot for labor in this country, and that's not a bad thing. "Labor" is not a bad word, as I think most people would have us believe.

Wrong. The employee has the ultimate leverage: they can take their skills elsewhere.

You're comparing apples and oranges if you look at the time period that made the unions with now. Back then most industries were monoplies, at least regionally and our society wasn't mobile enough for people to be moving from one city to another very often. Subsequently at that time you were correct, the employee had no leverage.

But now things are totally different. There are 100 different companies in my industry (software) in my city. If my employer doesn't treat me well I'll go work for one of the other 99. And I can always leave town and go work for any of the THOUSANDS of other software companies in this world.

Collective bargaining hasn't given the worker even fotting, they've given them the upper hand. All you need to do is look at the pay scale. These longshoremen, with no college education are making as much as software programmers with masters degrees. A simple comparison of the skill set and training necessary to do the jobs says there's no way in hell longshorement should be making programmer money. But they are, why? Collective bargaining. The longshoremen have the shipping companies balls in a vice and periodically squeeze for more juice. That's not an even playing field. When the employer has ZERO ability to give merit raises, to terminate incompitent employees, to determine what package tracking system they'll use; then they are negotiating from a position of weakness. The unions have the upper hand, and in this case they're willing to cripple the American economy with it.

The problem comes when there is an effort by unions to demand wages that would eventually force a company out of business. It really comes down to supply and demand - if too many dollars are chansing after too few items, you get yourself in trouble, and can only do so much.

the only way you can justify a higher price for your work is if you do it at a level that is productive enough to justify the extra expense of hiring you/keeping you.