Reply #21: My hypothesis - we're seeing this BECAUSE unions are weakened.

[backscatter712]

That's right. Not because unions are too strong, but because unionization and union actions are too difficult because of the legal structure in this country.

Allow me to explain.

When unions first came into being, anyone who worked could found a union - they just got together with a few coworkers and declared themselves to be a union. If the union was a big enough fraction of the workers in a plant, they could significantly disrupt operations if the workers were being mistreated too badly, thus forcing management to deal with them.

This also had the effect of making unions earn their keep - if they got corrupt, or the leadership made them look bad because of agreements in the above post, or the unions didn't represent their workers well enough, the workers could turn around, ditch that particular union and form a new union.

Then came regulation. Taft Hartley and such. Now, to form a union, there's a huge, messy, unwieldy process to go through, there has to be an election, and there's plenty of opportunities for hostile forces like the plant management to throw a monkey wrench into the works - there has to be elections, which are supposed to be fair, but frequently aren't. There's tons of paperwork, and rules, and if you slip up, you lose. That's why Wal-mart has been able to so successfully block its stores from unionization.

On top of that, it ended competiton between unions. Now there's just the established unions, and if they don't fly right, there are no alternatives. So the existing unions become corrupt. The negotiations between union and management become a joke, the management offer useless concessions (like "Workers can now have a reduced quota of flywheels if we switch to shittier health insurance.") and we see the mess we have today.

My prescription for improvement would be to repeal Taft Hartley and the other union regulation acts that have made such a mess of unions in this country. As for the unions and workers themselves, I'd recommend some civil disobedience. Wal-mart workers, for example, could declare themselves to be an informal union without going through the hoops that Wal-mart has been using to sabotage unionization, picket the stores, illegally (this is known as a wildcat strike;) which will probably get them fired; continue to picket the stores and try to get the customers to shop elsewhere, costing Wal-mart money, then harass the hell out of the scabs they hire as replacements. (Oops, did I say that with my outside voice? :evilgrin: ) Even without legal recognition, they could make life a living hell for Wal-mart's management, if they're willing to sacrifice a shitty $8/hr job (they could easily get another $8/hr job elsewhere while they picket.)

Am I far off the mark on this?