But to make $25 an hour on a union job, three other jobs had to be destroyed, or not created. The whole purpose of a modern union is to get more pay for less work for union members. If a company can't expand and create more jobs because of union wages, tough.
I've seen unskilled UAW workers, who make $50K per year on straight time, whine when the overtime vanishes, and they no longer take in $100K per year. They claim that their union status demands that the rest of us "buy union" so they can maintain their standard of living.
The strange thing is, union people still aren't happy with what they have. They constantly watch one another, making sure someone isn't working too hard, because maybe they will all have to. Or seeing someone getting away with less work, and trying to figure out how they can get away with it, too. You're no longer dependent on the company for your job (the union gave you your job), but instead have to stay in the good graces of the boss of your local union.
Like liberalism in general, unionism is based on envy, so you're in a constant struggle to get more for yourself with less work, while making sure that nobody takes anything away from you.
I don't blame the unions for demanding astronomical increases in wages and benefits and feather-bedding contract language. Even if management agrees to only half or less of the demands, the union is farther ahead than they were before. The unions are looking out for themselves, in their own short-sighted way. The bargaining agent doesn't care. He doesn't work for the company who employs the union members.
If government would just stay out of the way and let firms riddled with a history of bad decisions in contract negotiations naturally founder under the weight of their self-imposed inefficiences, maybe everyone else would get the message. Once everyone starts looking long-term, everyone will make money.