[lucumo]

> There is no reason for any employee to not search for unionization.

That's a very theoretical view. (As most absolutes are.)

Unions and rules around unions can be very different depending on locality, industry and other specifics. The power and benefits a union gives a specific employee may not outweigh the cost they impose on that specific employee.

Furthermore, unions are organizations. They have their own internal power structures that can be corrupted by self-serving individuals or special interests. A blanket "union = good" view can make that invisible to you.

[aaa_aaa]

In one of my previous work, I was "forced" to enter a public union. They were simply leeches sucking government money (surprise, government was paying union premiums) through workers with almost no actual benefits. Whenever somebody glorifies Unions I just chukle.

[tovej]

Was this in the US? In the US, anti-union action by the government and employers has been extra egregious historically. This has obviously impacted unions in the US.

There's also LOTS of anti-union misinformation spreading in the US.

[aaa_aaa]

No it was not in US

[one33seven]

So your point is, you have to look for a good union? Fully agreed!

[lucumo]

Almost. My point is that you have to see if a union is good (for you).

[eru]

The top level command suggested that any unionisation is good. Even with a terrible union.