Without labor unions, would labor standards stay the same or improve?

Question

There is a powerful hostility to unions on Yahoo Answers. Sure, without union, business economy my improve because it would leave employers with more money to reinvest in capital, but an improvement of the economy in this respect would not guarantee and improvement in labor standards, or would it?

Answer 1

The goal of Capitalism is to increase profits. Basic math: Profit = Revenue - Expenses. Decrease your expenses and you increase profit. Labor and it's associated costs are some of the first on the chopping block.

Craft (aka Skilled Trades) Union perspective:

OSHA and Labor Laws don't mean squat unless there is there to make sure a company is following the rules. If it's in a company's financial best interest to ignore the laws and regulations, they will. One person calling OSHA isn't going to get the response that a Union calling OSHA does.

Real Life Example: After a SO2 leak in a confined space, the plant managers ordered workers back into the area. Plant hands (who's job depends on doing what they are told) were going to go in. Union workers asked if the area had been tested; it had not. Union workers refused to go in until the area was tested and advised others not to go in either. Good thing too, the leak wasn't completely sealed off and SO2 levels were well above OSHA's PELs.

Another Real Example: OSHA requires safety harnesses for workers a specified number of feet off the ground. They do not get into too many details about the TYPE of harness. In this case, the company went with the cheap ones. These harnesses actually increase the danger to the workers by not retracting and "stopping" unexpectedly. Doesn't do any good to have a harness on if it doesn't catch you until you hit the ground, or it jerks you into falling.

Answer 2

WITHOUT UNIONS IS THE REALITY my honorable friend. things are now much worse as a result. it took years to get this way. it has gone too far. perhaps you didn't know but the unions went to far in the late 60s and the 70s. they abused their power. now, management has gone too far. the cycle is complete. "the worm has turned," as the old saying goes. the little people are mad and they make up the vast majority. you remember, "the working class?"

the little people are damn close to turning out in the streets. and some awesome results appear just around the corner. results that will make watts and detroit look feeble.

the ruling class and those "fools on the hill" have a blind eye, a tin ear and just don't get it. and the media, the "news", is a national joke. nobody believes that bull waste. just won't work anymore mr. moneybags.

they mock malcontents, call them traitors (michael moore vs. cnn), they jail protestors and beat them down. heck, they did it on tv in la recently. the little people are learning their lessons. they know they must unite to have any effect. and when nobody believes the media anymore, then the ruling class loses. then then things turn over. the little people always do that. sooner or later they leaders needed to pull the vast majority together will stand up and take on the power brokers that own the the tv transmitters and pull the strings.

the inequities are too great, the anger is too great and the time is ripe. the people are little but there are so many of us.

Answer 3

We owe a lot to unions and would also be justified for condeming them.
Unions gave workers a chance to receive some compensation for good work. They also train workers.
It gives the worker protection from abuses heaped on them by ruthless business managers.
They are responsible for some of the success of business.
Why?
Because businesses had few customers that could afford to buy their products.
Unions helped creat the the large economic "middle class" that now buys those products and big business grew as a result.
Once their power was established, the unions started to become abusive themselves. (Power corrupts!)
The unions promote violence as a "solution" to labor disputes. (Corporations aren't innocent of the same charge.)
They do not reward their best workers with quick promotions. The most capable individual must gain SENIORITY before he can move up in position and must do so behind an incompetent person who had been there longer.
It is a Socialist Marxist type of system that treats the competent and the incompetent as equals.
Then there are other factors like the ones that resulted in the death of our railroads.
The railroad unions would regularly shut down all American business by closing down all shipping when they wanted their workers to get some benefiit.
The power was too great.
They instituted "featherbeding". They had too many employees so they had some not doing anything but taking a ride on the train and still getting a BIG paycheck.
Eventually the government and big business became fed up with their extortion and built the interstate highway system. That effectively put the railroads and their unions out of business. It prevents national strikes that can shut down the entire nation.
Yes there is both good and bad to be said about unions.
The same is true for Corporations.
All would be better off if they wouldn't get greedy, but that is human nature.

Answer 4

What a great question!

It is a little difficult to answer since there is such a wide range of unions and industries.

First, let me say that I have great respect for the hard working people that are represented by organized labor.

There is no doubt that if Auto manufacturers could eliminate unions, they would and dramatically change benefits, wages, etc. The same applies to the airlines.

In terms of trades unions, there again, there is an issue. A lot of hard working people are represented by trades unions and are employed by smaller contractor's that may take advantage of people in the absence of representation.

However, in the big picture, unions were created well before the wealth of legislation that we have in the US regulating everything from safety (OSHA) to HR(wages, disability, etc) issues.

In balance, labor standards would improve. Companies would deal directly with their employees and they would be free from the handcuff of the collective bargaining agreement. In the case of auto makers and airlines, it would make us more competitive and create jobs "down the line" as companies are able to re-invest, spend capital money, etc.

I say this realizing that for some, labor standards would suffer, and we would need to fix that problem. There is little debate, however, that the elimination of labor unions would improve our economy, and make us more competitive globally.

Answer 5

OK, take this example: a union at a nearby plant was on strike for quite some time for health care or something...I don't remember. Something they deserved, but something they weren't likely to get without a fight.

So they eventually got what they wanted.

The plant will be closing very soon. The company decided it could make the product elsewhere, either at another plant or in some outsourced plant in another country.

So who wins? They got what they wanted, but they're going to be out of jobs quite soon. So they only enjoy the benefits as long as their severance package lasts.

You can only do so much with unions when you remember that companies can just up and leave whenever they want. There aren't enough controls on foreign goods coming in the country, and we just look the other way when countries commit human rights violations because we either want their super-cheap goods or we have factories there and want to take advantage of those oh-so-violable human rights ourselves. We never seem to impose sanctions on countries that we want stuff from.

So, in a world where workers can be exploited elsewhere for our financial gain here, how can unions work? They're a nice idea, and Lord love 'em, they've done a lot of good, but without a serious reduction of worldwide corruption, they're not going to fix much.

God, that's f*ckin' depressing. I wish it weren't true.

Answer 6

I was once a union carpenter and I tell you now that unions have priced themselves right out of competition.
At one time the US would have needed communism if not for the unions...which were naturally banned in most communist countries because they represented competition to socialism.
Today we have free trade,NAFTA, WTO, G8, the World Bank, and so on. Without strong unions, the conditions of the American laborer and the middle class are going down the drain.
Needless to say, all of these organizations and trade agreements undermine the power of our unions by undercutting prices of American made goods=lost union jobs and union companies going under. That's how Big Business in this country has used free trade to destroy American workers rights.
And the democrats went right along with the Republicans on this one.
Remember, I voted for Clinton the first time because George the first was pushing NAFTA. And as soon as the sob got into office, Clinton signs NAFTA!
They are BOTH set on crushing the American worker. That is why BOTH political parties want to create a low-wage Spanish-speaking slave class in this country. Crush the little guys, the ones that forced unions down their money-grubbing throats in the first half of the 20th century. Now it payback time for all you non-elites!
Enjoy!

Answer 7

People should remember that without unions, there would be no 40-hour work week, no 8 hour work days, no weekends, and child labor would be rampant. Thank unions for your benefits, because the employers sure wouldn't give them to you if they weren't forced to.

Answer 8

Actually it would vastly improve in today's world properly applied with technology and innovation of course. They are also causing quite a few of the problems we are in fact witnessing today. Also speaking of healthcare, go back and check out S.1955 under the 109th congress sometime. look at who voted against it, and who their primary financial contributors were. Then you'll start getting the picture. Healthcare is a very vital issue, but don't let a certain party play it off that they are the only ones that in fact care about it. They want socialism, pure and simple.

Answer 9

Most of the people who rant against labor unions have never:

- worked in a non-union shop headed by unscrupulous management.

- talked at length with their grandfathers, who could educate them on the reason unions were formed in the first place.

Answer 10

that was the same excuses they used in Mexico to get rid of labor unions. Now the owners get workers for 2. dollars a day. While they become the super rich. 30% of mexico owns the country and 52% are living on 2. for a 12 hour day.
would you like to give employers a opportunity to pay you what they want to pay you?
Why do you think they send jobs over seas to make those people rich? Now we are going to give you people a living wage? NO, they pay them 2. dollars a day because they can get by with doing that. No health care, no retirement, no pension.
Who is foolish enough to believe that big business is going to pay you a generous salary because they want to.
No pressure is put on them to do so. they just get to pay you what they want to and out of the goodness of their heart it is a generous salary?
They want to get rid of the Unions because they can get the workers together and strike for higher wages.
Better working conditions, so miners are not killed in coal mines because they refuse to do proper maintance.
Those owners of that mine where the men died were given a few dollars to the widows. I think it was 10,000. for all of them. That same month that same owner through a birthday party for his daughter that cost over 10,000. dollars.
Everyone called him generous for helping those widows burry their husbands. If he would have made sure the equipment worked they would not have died.
What he gave was pocket change to him.
that is what you call better?