Are unions outdated? Is striking really effective in our current society?

oftenreading

Where I live, public school teachers were on strike from the middle of last June through the scheduled first three weeks of this school year. Prior to going on a full strike, they took job action for several weeks, during which school days were shortened and extra-curricular activities were limited. Once they went on strike last June, classes stopped and there were no end-of-the-year activities for the little kids, and no exams (except required Provincial exams) for the high school kids. No marking was done, and so no grades were given and no report cards issued. That work will never be made up, which means that, while kids were passed on to the next grade level, there are no official marks on a transcript. There was no summer school, nor was the distance education program running to allow kids to make up classes they were missing or had failed. Although the teachers were on strike over the summer, negotiating stopped at the end of June and didn't resume until early September (a huge source of frustration for parents). Classes finally resumed three weeks late. In the end, the teachers ended up with a contract similar to what they were offered and rejected in the spring, with a few additions. Many of them have been vocal about the fact that they are angry and bitter at how this all played out. Public opinion was mixed, with many in support of the teachers getting more of what they were demanding, while many others feeling that the government was right in holding the line on raises/changes to working conditions that were out of line with what other public service unions had settled on, and some argued would require tax increases. Neither side seemed to behave particularly well, but the students lost a lot.

Obviously I have simplified many of the issues; this post is already too long. It seems to me, though, that few unions that strike these days actually end up with anything to show for it. Many employees lose days, weeks or months of income, and public support is limited when the public is inconvenienced. So what do people think - are the days of effective strikes in the past?

unsung

Chicago teachers had a strike, I believe iirc they secured a 17% raise.

blueandwhite

unsung said:

Chicago teachers had a strike, I believe iirc they secured a 17% raise.

I think it comes down to whether your job can be outsourced or not. If a union plays hardball in many private sector industries a company can simply close up shop and recover any costs associated with doing so by moving to a cheaper jurisdiction. Companies are extremely mobile these days and there are plenty of places where people are willing to work for wages that you couldn't survive on in the United States. I don't think we've seen such an imbalance between labour and management in a very long time.

The thing that really sucks about this is that small business owners aren't nearly as mobile as your average multinational. Striking may be ineffective with large companies with a global network but it can be brutally effective with smaller enterprises that are struggling to survive. If you're running a company with 40 employees in Delaware, there's a good chance that you are in no position to simply uproot your business and move to where the labour is cheaper.

PJ_Soul

Unions are what keep the private sector in check IMO. They help to set an external standard. I don't think most people give unions the credit they deserve because their greatest effect isn't direct. If it weren't for unions, wages and rights in the private sector would be way worse than they are. I think unions are incredibly important to everyone, not just union members.

rgambs

PJ_Soul said:

Unions are what keep the provate sector in check IMO. They help to set an external standard. I don't think most people give unions the credit they deserve because their greatest effect isn't direct. If it weren't for unions, wages and rights in the private sector would be way worse than they are. I think unions are incredibly important to everyone, not just union members.

Totally agree. Here's an example. The company that bought my fathers factory has decided to shut the doors at the end of the year and it happens to be contract negotiation time. They are trying to deny severance pay and everything else provided in the union contract. Normally, operations continue under the old contract until a new one is in place, but now they want the employees to continue working without contract. Workers with 30 years in the plant left with no severance, subject to wage reductions, and screwing with the schedule. So striking is their only power. If concessions aren't made and obligations met, the workers will picket and say good luck to Mondi Group in meeting your existing orders, fulfilling your contractual obligations with customers, and clearing your expensive machines and inventory from the location. If the steel union backs the picket things get ugly. Desperation is a powerful weapon! So is spite when its the only thing left.

zarocat

If there were no unions I would not be making enough money to sustain myself.

oftenreading

I'm guessing there may be differences between unions operating in the private sector and those operating in the public sector. I am struggling to remember any public sector strike in our province in quite some time that has led to a significant enough improvement in wages or working conditions for their members to make the strike worthwhile.

Drowned Out

If you want to see a pretty cut and dry inverse graph, check comparisons of union membership and income equality.
And I bet you would find a correlation if comparing union membership to social activism. Student groups and unions lead the way in most serious protests. Both groups have been pretty much marginalized by more powerful ngo's on the government lobby stage...a big part of how we've become so damn near fascist...

Stickman12

Nobody wins in a strike. Union workers lose out on earnings and wages and the company usually has a financial hit accompanied by negative press and public relations.

PJ_Soul

oftenreading said:

I'm guessing there may be differences between unions operating in the private sector and those operating in the public sector. I am struggling to remember any public sector strike in our province in quite some time that has led to a significant enough improvement in wages or working conditions for their members to make the strike worthwhile.

I work for a public sector union and we went on strike because the administration was trying to put our pension fund under the local's contract instead of part of a consortium between three unions. It worked. Plus the Labour board deemed their attempt to do that illegal - bargaining in bad faith.
Our local has been forced to strike twice in 12 years, and while our wages still do not even clome close to keeping up with inflation, striking has definitely been key to us maintaining certain important benefits.... No, that doesn't mean improvements, but at least it's helped to prevent a decrease in benefits, which is what the admin is contantly gunning for, and using incredibly shady tactics in doing so.

rgambs

ejleonjr said:

Nobody wins in a strike. Union workers lose out on earnings and wages and the company usually has a financial hit accompanied by negative press and public relations.

It's hard to imagine you've done any serious study of the issue if that's your conclusion. I'd suggest Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Capitalism unchecked is a recipe for disaster. Organized labour is the backbone of the middle class, Any jobs outside of a union that pays well can be thankful that unions exist to set standards that private companies must meet.

With that said, unions have their problems. Strong performers are not compensated and weak performers are protected to the detriment of other members. There needs to be models of accountability for performance. In short, unions need to evolve.

rgambs

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Capitalism unchecked is a recipe for disaster. Organized labour is the backbone of the middle class, Any jobs outside of a union that pays well can be thankful that unions exist to set standards that private companies must meet.

With that said, unions have their problems. Strong performers are not compensated and weak performers are protected to the detriment of other members. There needs to be models of accountability for performance. In short, unions need to evolve.

Unions definitely need to evolve! And they need to get away from becoming big businesses themselves, replete with overpaida admins and rampant corruption.nd

oftenreading

rgambs said:

ejleonjr said:

Nobody wins in a strike. Union workers lose out on earnings and wages and the company usually has a financial hit accompanied by negative press and public relations.

It's hard to imagine you've done any serious study of the issue if that's your conclusion. I'd suggest Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"

I can't speak for ejleonjr and do not know what was intended by that comment, but I don't doubt the historical importance of unions and striking; rather, my question was more around the current value. Many union people I talk to are dissatisfied with the direction their unions have taken. However, it seems like several people on this board have either seen or been directly involved in cases where the members have benefited from striking, so thanks for that info.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

In terms of the OP, that strike was ridiculous.

Strikes can have an impact if the company is losing profits as their employees don't attend to their jobs. In such a case, the company is motivated to rectify grievances and employees stand the chance to make gains that a stubborn employer might not have offered until pointing a gun at their heads.

In the public school teachers' strike (their 3rd in a decade), once again, teachers forfeited their wages and funded their own raise. Not to mention they kept kids out of classes for a month.

It became apparent that the Government wanted to squash the teachers' union and seemed hell bent on doing so. They may have succeeded: many teachers are steamed that the offer they accepted after striking for 4 weeks and having been 'locked out' for a month with a 10% wage garnish,,, was WORSE than the one they could originally have accepted.

Poor leadership and old school tactics created much hardship for teachers in this dispute. The union is trying to sell a victory to its members- but only the very naïve feel it has been one. Most are very angry at the cliff the executive drove them to and pushed them over.

And as for RG's post... the teachers' union collects $41 million a year. A YEAR! They paid out $3.5 million in strike pay and claimed they had no more to pay members. How interesting is that?

Reckless.

rr165892

As an Independent Corp ,we like that we are a right to work state here in FL ,and are not forced into certain criteria that come with union employee hiring.As I feel it hurts not helps smaller corporations like mine.We take very good care of our own anyway so it's not an issue.
But I feel differently on bigger commercial and governmental contracted projects.I want union folks on these big projects.Electrical,steel workers,pipe fitters,etc.And I do see a need in professions with a large number of active members like Fire Fighters,law enforcement,teachers,etc.

pjhawks

i don't think they are outdated but i do think some of their ideals are outdated.

i also think their blind support of bad workers is a huge problem that does nothing but make them look bad. too often times everything has to be a fight with unions even when no reasonable person can understand them supporting certain members or certain ideals.

and i would say don't judge most or all unions based on the teacher unions. while i understand the importance of teachers i think often times their ideals of what teachers should make and get border on the absurd.

rgambs

"I think often times their ideals of what teachers should make and get border on the absurd."
So what value do you place on the people thattake care of and teach your children? You value them less than your accountants, lawyers, and bankers? What is the person who does your job as a parent for you worth? I'd say it's worth quite a bit more than what you would think is absurd I guess.

oftenreading

I agree, pjhawks, that unions sometimes seem to go to the wall to support workers or situations that (almost) everyone objectively agrees are unproductive or downright unsafe. I have seen a nurses union, for instance, repeatedly support (i.e. prevent the termination of) an incompetent nurse whose medical errors put patients at risk. In some cases there seems to be an idea that a strong union is one which does not permit any of its members or policies to be questioned.

pjhawks

rgambs said:

"I think often times their ideals of what teachers should make and get border on the absurd."
So what value do you place on the people thattake care of and teach your children? You value them less than your accountants, lawyers, and bankers? What is the person who does your job as a parent for you worth? I'd say it's worth quite a bit more than what you would think is absurd I guess.

i take great value in what they provide to my community BUT that doesn't mean in bad economic times they should automatically get raises and free healthcare. as for what they make compared to other professions remember to base their pay on 9 months a year and not 12 AND that most towns pay into their pensions for retirement. and don't even get me started on the ridiculous amount of vacation days and the fact that they can carry those days over year to year if not used.

Pensions in general are such an outdated concept and are placing cities in huge financial trouble these days. We need to get out of the Pension business for local and state employees.

Edit: Just because i disagree with how their union represents them doesn't mean I don't value them. These opinions are based on a business perspective. you can't have a healthy debate when any dissenting opinion is somehow labeled anti- whatever group you are talking about. i am not anti-teacher.

Godfather.

as a union member I can tell you there is good and bad points in the unions but you also have to remember that union pay scale pretty much sets the standard for pay wages in the non union shops , if it were not for union and the people that fought to create these unions we may still owe our "souls to the company store" or working unsafe conditions for very little wages, I would hate think whatnthe working wage for non skilled workers or even a master tradesman might be if the men and women before us had not unionized and demanded better working conditions and fare pay....but now unions are so powerful that they go unchecked and the union leaders have become good at controling for profit and hiding their ...misdeeds.


Godfather.