Are Unions Needed Anymore?

Labor unions have been in the news a lot lately. This past week, the public employees union (most notably teachers) in Wisconsin was all over the news. The Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker (R), is attempting to pass a law that would remove the rights of the State Union employees to collectively bargain on the amount they pay for their health benefits and pension. This lead to a week of protests at the capital, teachers participating in a sick out, and Democrat lawmakers fleeing the state to avoid voting on this issue. Wisconsin currently has a $3.6 Billion dollar budget deficit, and a balanced budget amendment, so something has to give. Governor Walker has already said that either this bill goes through, or 6,000 state employees have to be laid off. I could do pages and pages on the Wisconsin issue, but I think anyone who reads this blog knows who I side with on this one. We're all gonna have to make sacrifices to turn things around, and that includes unionized workers.

The Wisconsin public workers union is not the only union in the news. The NFL Players Association and NFL owners are nearing an owner lockout because they can't agree on a revenue split. Looks like the NBA is up next. This got me thinking, are unions even needed in this country anymore? I would argue no, and here are several reasons why.

First, the statistic that I heard a while back is that only about 12% of all workers in this country are unionized. So, this means the other 88% of workers in this country get by without unionizing. It goes without saying that not all of those non-union employees are thrilled with their wages and benefits, but it does point to the fact that most jobs available today do not feel the need to unionize.

Second, unions end up causing expense issues that need not happen. For example, I would argue, and most experts would agree, that one of the main reasons for the GM and Chrysler collapses were union negotiated contracts. Sure, the management of those companies was equally at fault for signing those deals as well. But I would argue that the union nature of those deals made it more difficult for those companies to adapt when they should have...obviously Ford had a vision the others did not and reacted appropriately, so in fairness, this alone is not enough reason to say unions are no longer useful.

Third, and I think this might be the most important reason, conditions are vastly different now than 100 years ago when unions formed. When the unions formed, workers were paid pennies to work in dangerous conditions. At that time, unions absolutely had a place in American industry, and they drove some really good changes. We now have agencies like OSHA to help ensure workplace safety. We are also a much more mobile society now, so if you don't like the conditions of your current job, you have options that you didn't have 100 years ago.

Finally, unions are really career limiting. Once you sign into a union, you are subject to whatever the contract says, whether you perform far above expectations or far below expectations. Unions allow the bottom of the barrel to hang on for years and years and years, while keeping the top performers from being rewarded like they should be. In a global market where companies have to be competitive, they need to keep their top performers, and they need a mechanism to motivate, and if necessary, get rid of the bottom feeders. Unions stifle this ability for businesses.

I think unions are an institution that's time needs to come to an end. Really, the only reason unions stay around now are because they are a powerful political arm of the Democratic party, and Democrat politicians do whatever they can to keep the unions as strong as they can. Should 12% of the population have the power they have? Yet, they do because the Democrats need them. Look how President Obama reacted to the Wisconsin situation this week. His campaign arm (Organizing for America) is helping to organize the protests! This is the President of the United States, directly meddling where he has no Constitutional right to meddle. Frankly, Obama should have kept his mouth shut and stayed completely out of this. This is a state issue, so let the state work it out. But Obama had to stand up for his union cronies. He needs them if he wants to have any shot at a 2nd term and he knows it.

I don't know if you'll all agree with me on this one, but I think I make a good case that we don't need unions anymore. Now if I can just get people in a position to do something about these issue to start reading my blog.