Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unions Keep Losing Members -- Can They Reinvent Themselves?
Forbes ^ | January 29, 2015 | George Leef

Posted on 01/29/2015 9:23:04 AM PST by reaganaut1

The latest figures on union membership from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that the long decline has continued to the point where the percentage of Americans in unions is lower now than at any point in the last century.

That decline has not been arrested even by the extraordinarily pro-union actions of the National Labor Relations Board (such as this Arkansas case where two-third of the workers have petitioned for an election to decertify an unwanted union, but the NLRB has gone to court to block that) and union efforts at greasing the rails for election victories, as occurred with Volkswagen management in Chattanooga. Big Labor is obviously addicted to the old-fashioned tactics of dragooning workers into their ranks by hook or by crook, then relying on coercion to keep them there.

Whereas the prospect of union representation seemed very alluring to many workers back in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, the promises of union organizers today largely fall on deaf ears. The Heritage Foundation’s James Sherk was correct in saying, “They’re selling a product that hasn’t changed that much since the 1930s when America’s labor laws were founded. Today’s workers simply aren’t that interested in purchasing what unions have to sell.”

One big reason why many don’t want unionization is that they know much of the money they’ll have to pay in will go to support political candidates and causes they oppose.

It’s crucial to understand that workers do not “join” unions the way Americans join any other sort of organization.

(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial
KEYWORDS: georgeleef; unions
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 01/29/2015 9:23:04 AM PST by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

They need to address the question of what purpose they serve, and be honest about it.

There is really no need for “collective bargaining”, other than enriching the union heads.

On the job safety is no longer an issue.


2 posted on 01/29/2015 9:24:43 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Unions have become, basically, a protection racket...”you do what we say or we’ll strike, or sue!”.


3 posted on 01/29/2015 9:30:09 AM PST by FrankR (They will become our ultimate masters the day we surrender the 2nd Amendment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FrankR

Gov’t unions are the worst.

It’s entity A (unions) and entity B (government) “negotiating” how much it’s going to cost entity C (the taxpayer).


4 posted on 01/29/2015 9:35:24 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

In the private sector, parasites eventually kill the host. In the public sector, parasites grow the host.


5 posted on 01/29/2015 9:38:56 AM PST by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrankR
Unions have become, basically, a protection racket...”you do what we say or we’ll strike, or sue!”.

Unions are also very deeply entrenched in politics — they have been, for a long time, a sort of fundraising organization for politicians.
Let them go under.

6 posted on 01/29/2015 9:40:45 AM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MrB

” Gov’t unions are the worst.”

They should be outlawed, because their enemy is the American taxpayer!


7 posted on 01/29/2015 9:40:55 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker (My Batting Average( 1,000) (GOPe is that easy to read))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Absotutely.

With Card Check + amnesty (lots of semi-literate workers to organize) they can be back to where they were within about five years.


8 posted on 01/29/2015 9:42:04 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
If they do it right, the ranks could swell when illegal immigration “amnesty” takes affect.
9 posted on 01/29/2015 9:42:30 AM PST by stylin19a (obama = Eddie Mush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Job safety was a thing that COULD have been and absolutely SHOULD have been addressed by legislation. Legislation, however, would not have enriched the democrat party with union dues.


10 posted on 01/29/2015 9:44:18 AM PST by Doctor 2Brains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MrB

While their membership in the lower employment circles decreases, their power in government unions increases.

I’d rather it be the other way around.


11 posted on 01/29/2015 9:48:29 AM PST by Loud Mime (Rather have Obama as President than a Rino? SMART! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

They have long lived past their usefulness or need......................


12 posted on 01/29/2015 9:48:49 AM PST by Red Badger (If you compromise with evil, you just get more evil..........................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Why would an employer with half a brain want a union shop? A union is only for itself, not its members, not the employer. A union doesn’t make a company more profitable, it makes it less profitable.

A union gives an employer NOTHING. They cannot make their members show up every day; they can’t make their members not call in sick when they’re not sick; they can’t make their members give their best effort everyday.

Granted, there are some unions that at least make a pretense of offering their members training to keep and improve their skills, provide a good retirement (provided the fund isn’t raided by the fat cats before the members can retire). But in the end, a union mostly benefits their Organized Crime bosses.


13 posted on 01/29/2015 9:53:00 AM PST by Auntie Dem (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Terrorist lovers gotta go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
They need to address the question of what purpose they serve, and be honest about it. There is really no need for “collective bargaining”, other than enriching the union heads.

Private sector Unions really only serve one legitimate function these days: protection from corrupt management. Most other functions have been subsumed into the business environment created by the government.

"Collective bargaining" seems to be the procedural price for that protection.

14 posted on 01/29/2015 10:00:22 AM PST by papertyger ("News" is what journalists want you to hear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

The could reinvent themselves. But I don’t think they have the leadership to do so.


15 posted on 01/29/2015 10:02:18 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Well, they could go back to what they originally did — collective bargaining with large employers — rather than what they do now — lobbying the government for monopolies for their members and using their members dues to advance left-wing candidates and causes.


16 posted on 01/29/2015 10:13:59 AM PST by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Can they reinvent themselves? No. Once a hooker takes the first dollar she is labeled for life. So it is with the labor unions. They sold out to world wide Marxist ideology decades ago. They are what they are.


17 posted on 01/29/2015 10:16:14 AM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone
No. Once a hooker takes the first dollar she is labeled for life.

Yup. That is why the unions were willing to renegotiate ALL of the contracts and bennies (including the inflated health insurance) at the end in WI, in exchange for having bargaining rights continue. They were willing to give up eveything they bargained for to keep the seat at the table.
18 posted on 01/29/2015 10:21:50 AM PST by Dr. Sivana (There is no salvation in politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Communists are not real attractive. Their racism sucks, too.


19 posted on 01/29/2015 10:33:02 AM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
They can repackage themselves as frontmen for the International Communist Party.

Oh wait. That wouldn't require much of a change.

20 posted on 01/29/2015 10:40:35 AM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson