[ActorNightly]

Not really true.

For industries where you need x human labor to do x amount of defined work, unions definitely help employees. Companies have an incentive to extract as much labor while keeping wages the same or lowering, leveraging peoples need for a job. Also for a lot of positions in those industries, the pay is low enough to put significant friction for employees into doing things like switching jobs, especially when employees start getting specialized and becoming limited to a certain industry, where all the companies are incentivized to do the same thing.

However, for industries where you want to select for the best and brightest to advance tech, unions are a bad thing, because they effectively remove the capability of the companies to do this.

You could make an argument that both of those cases should be governed by a common principle, and that technology development is generally better for society, so unions are generally a bad thing, but that is a pretty complex issue.

[throwaway73838]

I would like to respond to you in depth, but I think a better option would be to recommend a good book on the subject. “Economics in one lesson” by H Hazlitt. First published in 1945, it explains, in clear terms, economic fallacies which existed at that time, and I’m sorry to say are still prevalent to this day, and possibly even more so. He explains the concepts better than I ever could. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_in_One_Lesson

[scarface74]

Haven’t those same companies just picked up and moved to a none union shop?