[s1artibartfast]

I think their point is that the American form of unionization is bunk. If you look to Europe workers are free to choose between many associations of voluntary unions which advocate for their specific interests. They are not forced to have a single representative for negotiations with their employer and are free to abstain from of participation as well.Much like the American voting system and American Congress, unions are winner take all majority rule. If you are in the minority of a union it may not advocate for your interest and you have no option to turn to.

[mola]

American mentality embraces zero sum game as the only possibilty, so the end game is usually bad but stable results.

[pjc50]

The term for this is "closed shop".

I've no idea why the US unions tend to be closed-shop, possibly because the high antagonism from employers makes it the only stable solution.

[Frondo]

The Taft-Hartley Act banned closed shops in 1947:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#United_States

It's literally the first line of that section.

[pjc50]

So why are so many people in this thread complaining about "having" to join a union?

[makomk]

On paper, that means you don't have to join the union in order to get a job - just pay the union fees and work under the union contract (which is to say, almost all the downsides of joining but without any actual say in how the union is run). In practice, I think people who do this tend to get blacklisted by the union and have trouble getting jobs in future. I know the Hollywood unions in particular are very aggressive and public about threatening anyone who takes that option with blacklisting, and there are zero consequences for them for doing this.

[whimsicalism]

As a counterpoint, in my unionized school district, both options were quite popular and you didn't need to pay the full dues, only like 70%.

[opencl]

The law bans employers from requiring people to be union members before they are hired. In states without right to work laws it is still legal to require employees to join the union after being hired.

[pseudalopex]

No. It's legal to require non members to pay an agency fee for the services the union is required to provide them.[1]

[1] https://fee.org/articles/the-myth-of-compulsory-union-member...

[pjc50]

So it's still a closed shop in practice? Was the only point of passing this law to confuse the issue?

[foerbert]

I don't see how that could be their point. They said nothing about multiple unions, nor is the article in any way related to it.