[0des]

> Democratically run unions give employees real negotiating power over what it means to go to work day to day.

I've been part of a few and this has never been the case in my experience.

[thathndude]

My wife was in a union and was able to decline membership. She was straight up bullied/harassed by her union-belonging peers when she left (saving some serious cash — relatively speaking — by not having to pay dues anymore).

Nothing about her job changed when she left the union.

I have no issues with unions, provided the employees have the choice to belong. But there’s the rub many (most?) states require membership (and dues) if there’s a union. And that’s never sat right with me.

[matsemann]

If everyone could reape the benefits but don't pay there would be no unions.

Did your wife also try to skip paying taxes? Do you have "no problems with taxes as long as they're not mandatory"?

[0des]

> If everyone could reape the benefits but don't pay there would be no unions.

Right to work states exist for this reason, and they do fine. Unions in a right to work state are not mandatory.

[wiredone]

I’ve been sound a few and have seen the same. The wannabe politicians and “negotiators” that are attracted to these union roles are the bullies or powerbrokers from middle school who tend to love the power that comes from those roles. They’re also actively motivated to be at odds with the employer which tends to make them part of the problem not the solution.

I genuinely see this as bad for online retail.