| >since unions generally double workers' wages. >My feeling is that had we been unionized, we would have made at least $17/hr You can dismiss this as anecdotal if you wish, but I went from a non-union job to a union one, requiring much the same skills, and the latter pays less. On a per hour basis, my current job pays 95% of the non-union position, but the main difference is 7.5 hours vs. 8 hours a day. That means my yearly salary is more like 87%. On the plus side, you are guaranteed raises over time, which my former employer explicitly disclaimed, saying all pay raises were based on "merit". It's also nice that you know everybody at the same level is making the same amount. I'm not going to generalize about all union jobs from my experience, but from a theoretical perspective, if a union offers security and better benefits then it's plausible people would be willing to give up a certain amount of pay. One aspect of having a union that I hadn't considered was that in March, they had to have a lot of intensive negotiations about working from home, because the existing contract did not allow it. |
Over your career, doesnt getting raises matter more than immediately more money that will never increase? and without a union could be ended at anytime.
Over a 25 year career, assuming 3% raises, you make 30% more. Plus you worked 3125 hours less.