I don’t think anyone wants to replicate the Soviet Union, do they? Either they are stupid, or they have no idea how it actually worked. One had “a job”, a government job of course - but it was assigned - it might mean a commute - and, one couldn’t quit either, nor transfer, etc. “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.”
Unions are in some ways a victim of their own success. Weekends, for one example, are now pretty much standard fare in the US. This isn’t the natural order of things or the default. 80+ hour workweeks used to be standard at some factories. Minimum wages, paid holidays, etc, many of the fought for work conditions have been folded into federal and state laws for all employers whether unionized or not.
I would not be so sure about this. The old USSR worked just fine for those in power.
One had “a job”, a government job of course - but it was assigned - it might mean a commute
Jobs were not assigned in the USSR, with the only exception of university graduates who had to work for 3 years at a place relevant to their education (as a limited pay for the education.) But even graduates had more than one choice. Everyone else had 100% freedom to move from one job to another.
and, one couldn’t quit either, nor transfer, etc.
That's not how it was in the USSR. Anyone could quit, usually with a couple weeks of warning out of kindless of one's heart. Transfers were also possible and very common (especially between departments of one larger organization.)
“We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.”
This is absolutely correct. However a good deal of wealth was distributed outside of the paycheck, such as huge rent discounts, free medicine, often free land outside of the city (a "dacha") and so on. Many employees could comfortably live and raise family on half of their salary, so much life was subsidized. For example, you could buy 1,500 loafs of bread for one engineer's monthly salary. If we translate that to modern US realities he'd be earning $4,500/mo which is not that bad. Or rent - he'd spend less then 20% of his salary on rent, which again translates into ($1,500/0.2) = $7,500/mo - not bad at all. Given that food and housing are most important (and kindergarten is free, as well as schools [public only] ) - you can see that even a lowly machinist at some remote factory could live his whole life happily, not needing more money to buy an airplane or a palace (he couldn't anyway.)
But that's why lower strata of the society (workers) were happy enough. Those in power had access to more money and more resources. For example, legally you couldn't own a certain prized property, but you could "use" it as long as you hold a certain job, and you don't need to pay for it or its maintenance! In the same way you couldn't afford a luxury car, but one often came with the job.
The most important fingerprint of the USSR, though, is the complete isolation of rulers from the ruled. Elections meant nothing because you could only vote for the lowest levels of representatives. Really important positions were assigned by bureaucracy with no input from the people. This is something that many governments would like to emulate - it guarantees their existence forever (as long as they don't ruin the country in the process.)