[909990]

This doesn't even make any sense. Unions have nothing to do with turning companies into world leaders. That's management's responsibility. You just brushed off the parent commenter's argument that management was responsible for designing shitty cars that nobody wanted to buy because it doesn't fit your narrative.

[coffeemug]

> Unions have nothing to do with turning companies into world leaders.

No, but the fact that there are no unionized companies in the U.S. that are world leaders in their market segment wiggles its eyes suggestively at the idea that the problem might have something to do with unionization.

[ozborn]

As pointed out by another poster, Hollywood is a "world leader" in movie production and is heavily unionized. Another heavily unionized high tech industry in the US is the aerospace industry (Boeing) as is its competitor in the EU (Airbus).

[mathattack]

I do stand corrected on movies. Even though a lot of filming now happens abroad, this does seem like the major example

I don't view Boeing and Airbus as shining examples of success. Both get large government subsidies. Both have had their share of problems over the years, perhaps more Airbus lately. And there are just 2 of them. It's not a competitive industry. When you're splitting oligopoly profits, there is more room for unions. This actually is also the instance where I do think unions have the most standing. If there's no place else to go work, you kind of need a union. In addition to "the only mine in town" I think this also applies to fire and police departments. I don't think it applies to schools - I'd much rather see more choices (charters, etc) - but that's a much longer post.

[909990]

Another problem with your question is that it focuses just on the United States where most jobs aren't even unionised. BMW, Mercedes Benz, and Volvo are all unionised in their country of origin. 95% of all schools in Finland are unionised and they churn out the best students in the world.

Furthermore, nobody here knows what qualifies as a world leading company to you. That's your opinion. General Electric, UPS, all of America's major professional sports teams, Safeway, Budweiser, Coors Brewing Company, Carhartt, are unionised. You don't consider Boeing a shining example of success because they take government subsidies. But that's really besides the point because they make great planes for countries all across the world where they do have to compete. They're a world leader. Non-unionised companies have to compete with companies that are unionised when it comes to a worker's pay and benefits to get the best workers.

But like I said before, the premise of your question is ridiculous.

[adharmad]

Union intransigence has led to situations where management is constrained by not being able to fire bad workers and reward good ones reducing competitiveness and ultimately leading to inefficiencies and bad products.