Unionization of America

I have never been a fan of unions in the United States. Here is a paper I wrote for a class I attended at Trinity International University:

The forces that control the government are using the unions in the United States to bypass laws in the redistribution of wealth. The very definition of unions is to make everyone equal regardless of the person’s abilities. For those who see their jobs as a potential challenge to succeed, that portion of their job, or even their lives, will be irrevocably altered if forced to join a union. These unions in the United States are taking over the workforce and holding down individuals who would otherwise prosper in our economy. They form another level of bureaucracy, inserting additional fees upon everything they interact with and make it that much easier for companies wishing to lower their payroll to decide to move their businesses overseas.
 
Saying “NO” to Unions

Unions in the United States are taking over the workforce and holding down individuals who would otherwise prosper. The leveling of the playing field for all people not only raises the bottom worker making them even with the midlevel workers, all without contributing anything substantial to the workplace, but also holds back those who could otherwise be over-achievers from getting the raises and benefits they may deserve.

Selena Maranjian, a pundit for the Motley Fool wrote; “In theory, at least, unionized workers might become so comfortable and protected that they lose the incentive to work hard for their employer. And outstanding employees might lose their get-up-and-go if there's no incentive to excel -- or worse, if they're pressured by the union to not go the extra mile.”1

What they fail to realize is they will be working for the same companies that answer to stockholders and the board of directors when payroll costs are up and projected profits are down. These are the people who decide to move their manufacturing base overseas to countries whose economies greet the newcomers with open arms and the production costs are a fraction of the amount that unions have fought for over the decades here in the United States. The end result is the people the unions have fought for and brought into their fold are back where they once were; mainly uneducated, unemployed, and looking to the government to make it through the day.

How did we get to where we are today?

Equate the unionization of the United States workforce to an educational setting where the teachers were not allowed to fail a substandard student, but, at the same time, could not give an “A” to anyone who had clearly earned the advanced grade. In the short term, the parents of the students who had deserved the “A” grade would be upset, but the long term ramifications could be even more profound. When the student who did not achieve, but was rewarded with a non-failing grade would enter the workforce and not be able to perform to the level put forward by their managers, that person would not be able to maintain the job. The student who is able to achieve will do so after graduation no matter what profession is sought.

James Sherk says of unions in an article entitled “Should Unions prevent your next Raise?”; “They also hold back the economy. Workers -- like everyone else -- respond to incentives. Economists unsurprisingly find that when workers are not rewarded for working harder, they don't. But when companies pay for performance, employees become more productive. Workers at companies that start using performance pay seize the opportunity to get ahead -- they become more productive and their earnings rise between 6 and 10 percent. That creates more wealth for the entire economy.”3

By holding back the creative spirit of the American worker, you stifle that which has made the United States the best place to live, work, and raise a family among first world countries. If you make the individual strong, independent, and allow that freedom of spirit to roam free, the whole of the economy will prosper.

Unions Block Choice in Education

Teachers unions, through the opposition of student voucher programs, have a long historical stance in blocking parental choice to send their children to the public or private school of their choosing. The fear is many parents would shift away from public schools with poor track records, violence in the halls, and teachers who have resigned themselves to the status quo, in favor of attending a private school. These private schools, away from state sanctioned teachers unions, have a history of higher test scores, less in-school violence, and much more discipline in the class room. Teachers unions will raise millions of dollars to keep poor students, whose schools are some of the worst in the nation, the same schools despite the alternatives.

To emphasize this point, take a look at this segment from The Phyllis Schlafly Report dated August 2000; “At its annual convention over the Fourth of July weekend, the National Education Association flung down the gauntlet in its war against school competition, a.k.a. school choice. Meeting at McCormick Place in Chicago, the delegates voted to impose a $5 a year increase in each member's dues in order to raise $6 million to combat vouchers and related ballot initiatives.”2

Teachers unions are even opposed to the home-schooling of children, citing that only state licensed persons should be able to teach and only state authorized curriculum should be taught. Those parents who have an opposition to in-school teaching of sex education in public schools have a say in the curriculum of a home schooled child, but none in the public school system. This is a power play brought on by the teachers’ unions to maintain their power base and therefore control of our future.

When people voted positively for the school voucher programs across the United States, it had teachers’ unions terrified. They were losing their power when parents voted and enrolled their children in religious schools. The safety and stability offered by a Christian-based curriculum in a religious school could not be countered by public school administrators. The cost per student was less, the test results were higher, and discipline was upheld to a higher standard. Overall, public schools were not able to compete with private schools in the open market, so the unions struck back in the only venue that would listen to them; the court of law. In the end, it was the students who suffered when forced back into their violence ridden schools where studying came in a close second to political correctness.

Unions impact us all

Even if the impact is tangential at best, much of our lives are held in check by union pressure. There is much that is influenced by American unions from the reaping and transporting the food we eat to the entertainment industry we all enjoy. One of the most populous and influential of unions is the Teamsters. If they should decide to strike and refuse to deliver their goods because they want more from their negotiated contracts than their employers are will to give, much of the food and goods that cross our country every day would go undelivered.

Should the Teamsters vote to strike, they would still receive compensatory pay from the union they belong to until a new agreement could be reached. All other people involved in the aspects of the distribution of goods, from manufacturing to selling, would be out of a paycheck. A Teamster strike alone would cause ripples through our economy that may well take years to fully recover.

Unions and Socialism

The thinking and mentality which all workers should receive the same pay and benefits, regardless of education, motivation, or skills is very pervasive within certain segments of socialist teachings. This happens to be a core belief of those who would see the United States become a more socialist country. Many people also believe that the United States is prosperous enough to spread its vast wealth to those less fortunate. These are the people that unions prey upon; low education, living poor neighborhoods, but hard working for the most part. They are enticed with worker protection, benefits not otherwise available to them, a higher than average wage, and becoming a part of something larger than them. One thing kept from them, either overtly or covertly, is that they will no longer receive individual compensation they once had available to them. People who could reckon on obtaining a higher individual raise by an evaluation of their deeds now get the same raise even the lowest performing worker can count on.

With so much news of people across the globe trying to shrug off their socialist bonds and become more like the United States, why is it so many in power here are struggling to become more socialist? Many other countries do not appreciate what a free society and workplace can bring to the local and national economy and assume all productivity comes from the state. These other countries, many of them socialist in nature, rely on the people working for the government to make the government strong and keep the individual weak.

Unions prevent fair Competition

Before deregulation in the mid-1970s, United States automakers had a virtual stranglehold on the entire auto industry. The fact that a unionized autoworker assembled a car at one of “the Big Three” United States automakers, Chrysler, Ford, or GM, added several thousand dollars to the final cost of the vehicle by way of higher wages and benefits. These higher prices were passed on to the consumer, not taken by the auto industry in terms of lower profits. Even when not working, due to plant closures and work shortages, does not mean that those factory workers are not still being paid. These union members, by contract, were still bringing in the same wage as if they were productive on the assembly line. Competition in a free market system has proven to breed a higher quality product at a lower price. It is the basis for our economy and unions seem to go against the very fiber of that theory; produce as little as you can and still maintain your employment.

Unions tend to prevent fair competition in government jobs by only allowing unionized companies to bid on many profitable jobs; “In what appears to be a bill for political pay-back, [Rep. Hollenbaugh] would allow the state to require companies bidding, negotiating, or working on any public works projects [to be union]. Right now, the law says the state cannot require the agreements, which leaves the bidding, negotiating or work for any contractor or business.”4
Haves versus the Have Not’s

Unions have had their place and time in American history. Where would we be today without the establishing of labor unions in the 1800’s? Business practices and work conditions of that time dictated that somebody do something drastic to ensure the safety and well-being of the worker. The companies that operated with 14 to 16-hr work days, no child labor statutes, and working conditions that border on the inhumane, mandated that, if the company would not do anything for the worker then the worker would have to look out for themselves. Workers banding together in a single voice and creating work stoppages to make them be heard was the best way for this to happen without overtly breaking the law.

The business sector has always done what was expedient for itself prior to unionization; maintaining poor work conditions and hiring unskilled laborers at the lowest possible wage knowing there were plenty of able bodied workers to take the place of anyone who quit or was injured on the job.

This mentality still holds true in many sectors today. Company profits are the top priority to the heads of many businesses and they will even sacrifice working conditions for higher profits. Companies will ship jobs overseas regardless of unionization or not to boost the bottom-line profits. If it is the people who make a company great, then unions are the way to make companies sit up and take notice of the great things they contribute to the workplace.


Conclusion

Unions are another form of classism, not allowing the average worker the ability to gain more and progress further than those around them in the same position using their God-given talents. The United States of America was founded on the idea that having the ability to choose what to do is always better than being told what to do. Any an individual, should be able to achieve what they have the ability, the heart, and the drive to achieve. We have been told for generations that any job worth having is one in which you can grow and prosper.

Personal responsibility is a much better way to approach any shortcomings workers may have in life. We are all encouraged to be educated and continue our education even into adulthood. By becoming educated adults, not only do we become more prosperous in our individual professions, but become more prosperous members of society as a whole giving back as much if not more than we have taken out.

If you are stifled from growing in your job, not because of limitations inherent within yourself or the position, but by a contract, a piece of paper that others have agreed upon, is that really any job you should strive to obtain?

References
1 Selena Maranjian October 30, 2003 www.fool.com/investing/general/2003/10/30/unions-good-or-bad.aspx

2 The Phyllis Schlafly Report, August 2000, Vol. 34 No. 1

3 James Sherk, June 5, 2009, “Should Unions Prevent Your Next Raise?”

4 Montana Main Street Blog, February 20, 2009