July 26, 2005

Unions Demise Was Inevitable

It's simple, the time of unions being powerful and relevant has long since past. Early in the 20th century when workers were oftentimes exploited by immensly powerful and heavy handed corporations the union was a natural, dare I say, even needed result.

The federal government oftentimes sided with the corporations (because they frequently were on the payroll as well) little power and few protections were afforded the average working man. The unions helped to fill the vacuum. They leveled the playing field forcing companies to negotiate with a partner of co-equal or near co-equal strength. Corporations were still powerful, profitable and growing but the situations improved for the average worker as well raising his pay, benefits and overall standard of living while at the same time affording him some basic protections.

Somewhere along the line the federal government decided they needed to be the protectorate of the American working man. Over a period of decades literally thousands of laws, edicts and madates spewed from within the bowells of the bureaucracy provided a giant "bubble" of collective immunization for the multitudes of average Joe's. This concurrent with the progressively increasing greed of the unions began to spell the end.

Companies no longer bargained from a position of superior or even co-equal power. They became the underdog being battered frontally by the unions and flanked by the federal government. Productivity waned, profits suffered. The corporations began to realize that they could not win a war against two such overwhelming opponents head to head.

The strategy they developed was multi-faceted and ingenious. First, when a union or the federal government makes doing business at a profit unfeasable, close up shop. Either move to a non-union area of the country or move offshore or even shut down completely. Second, preempt the union. Offer higher salaries, more benefits, better working conditions up front. A happy employee does not want to rock the boat. If he believes the union will not make things significantly better for him, why bother. The union wants 15% of his pay; Why vote for a union when the federal government and the company will do it for free. Lastly, eliminate as many working people as possible. If there is a machine that can do it, buy it. If there's technology out that that can eliminate men from the payroll, incorporate it. No matter how long it takes to break even on the investment, it's worth it. And so the paradigm has changed.

The Teamsters are right about one thing, the political obsession of the AFL-CIO has hurt them. After all at least a third of the card carrying union members vote Republican. It irritates these 30% that a big chunk of what was formerly their money is going to prop up Democrats. Many causes of which they personally disagree are being funded by their dues and that creates animosity in the ranks. The unions for a long time now have neglected to dance exclusively with the person that brung em.

Union membership is declining precipitously. Company's that continue to be beat up by them are destined to take one of the above courses of action. There may come a time when the only workers in this country remaining unionized are federal and municipal government employees. After all being that profit is not an issue, it's only the government as an employer who still is content to allow themselves to be extorted.

Companion OpiniPundit

Posted by: Traderrob at 09:43 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 580 words, total size 4 kb.

1 >>>"After all being that profit is not an issue, it's only the government as an employer who still is content to allow themselves to be extorted." Also, a government agency can't realistically close shop and relocate to China. Unions fulfilled a need in their time, but they are an anacronysm in a global economy.

Posted by: Carlos at July 26, 2005 09:59 AM (8e/V4)

2 "Companies no longer bargained from a position of superior or even co-equal power. They became the underdog being battered frontally by the unions and flanked by the federal government" Are you in la-la land?

Posted by: actus at July 26, 2005 10:38 AM (UkIRz)

3 The SEIU and Teamsters were right. The AFL-CIO has spent too much time talking to the MSM/DNC the last 40 years and lost touch with their members. America's population has almost doubled in theat time and yet union membership is very slightly down! As an exJarhead I will give you one of many examples of how out of touch the AFL-CIO is. Last Summer the UAW in MoTown told Marines they could not park in the union lots while attending reserve meetings (weekends) because most of them had Bush stickers on their cars! You can bet this did not go over well with the W/E warriors; many of whom are union members. The President of the UAW took a lot of heat form patriots in Mich and after a month rescinded his order. Too late, the damage had been done. Jarheads have long memories. I know first hand, I still hate the Fonda family after 38 years!( part of my anger is because they financet the anti-America book JFK wrote in the early 70's with a slam on the Corp on the cover. A bunch of dirt bags raising an American Flag *UPSIDEDOWN! Fu-k the Fonda family for providing him the $. Thank God almost no one bought the book. But I remember!) _ I can give more examples if asked.

Posted by: Rod Stanton at July 26, 2005 12:21 PM (Z6yVb)

4 http://bullbythehorns. blogspot.com/

Posted by: Professor Peter Von Nostrand at July 26, 2005 05:25 PM (62QDG)

5 I would not recommend to a federal employee to join the union. I doubt that advancement will be hurried along. Rod: Ditto. I still hate the bitch also. Along with Kerry. Peter Von Nostril: Shut up and call your shrink.

Posted by: greyrooster at July 26, 2005 08:49 PM (CBNGy)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
21kb generated in CPU 0.0221, elapsed 0.1944 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.1834 seconds, 254 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.