By restricting the supply of talent, thus artificially driving up wages, but at the same time keeping a lot of people from being able to pursue their dream.
Only if union membership is both required and restricted. In each of my workplaces, union membership has been optional and open to anyone who works there. It's weaker bargaining-wise than a closed shop with entry requirements, but we've still been able to collectively negotiate to better outcomes (the current round is UCU's dispute with the universities and their pension fund over proposed changes to the pension scheme, which we look to be fighting off).
Fair enough. I'm used to union arrangements where membership is required for the given profession, which is pretty common in the US.
There's been a movement to right to work, but even then, the non-union employees are forced to abide by the union negotiated contract, which is bullshit.
|By which you mean, there's been a movement by employers towards the right to work for less.
Unions can keep people out of professions in a lot of places in the US. Right to work makes it so union membership isn't mandatory. Surely if the union is so awesome, voluntary membership would work just fine.
|What's bullshit is that non-union employees get the same benefits that a union fought for, without having to do any work to get them.
Take it up with the union leadership, not me pal. They're the ones agitating for this stuff.
Unions improve compensation by increasing the share of the profits pie given (or returned, rather) to labor, not by putting a stranglehold on new hiring.
> Unions improve compensation by increasing the share of the profits pie given (or returned, rather) to labor, not by putting a stranglehold on new hiring.
How do you think they magically achieve this?
Surprise - it's by threatening to restrict supply (not working for the company if they don't agree to the union's terms.)
|Unions improve compensation by increasing the share of the profits pie given (or returned, rather) to labor
Revenue pie, not profits pie. A union will negotiate better terms for itself if the leadership thinks it's appropriate, regardless of the health of the company.
A lot of people from pursuing their dream who would be willing to do it for less. That's always the crux of unions, is the people left at zero wages who were willing to do the exact same work for less wages than the current person with the job.