UNION EMPLOYER TUG-OF-WAR

      I've heard it said before that the time for unions has passed and more disparagingly, I've heard it said that unions exist to get the most money/benefits out of their employers for the least amount of work. Now I don't think the time for unions has passed. It may even be arguable that we need them now more than ever given the record levels of corporate greed and the massive pushes for "right to work" laws in this country.

      Right to Work, for those of you who don't know is more accurately described as "Right to Fire". Basically, the laws state that unions can't force, as a condition of employment, you to both join the union and pay dues to it. This is the "right to work" aspect of the law. Superficially it sounds good, but it really only exists to weaken the position of existing unions and to make it even more difficult for new ones to form. Right to Work laws promote leechism in future employees. In others words, you get all the benefits of union membership without having to pay into them. I personally oppose such legislation on the grounds that I feel the relationship between employer and employee is best protected by overreach. That is, if either side goes too far with demands, everyone loses.

      Now, if I take the statement, "Unions only exist to exact the most compensation out of their employer(s) for the least amount of work," I would say that it stands to reason that the opposite is true: "Employers only exist to exact the most work out of their employees for the least amount of compensation." For me, it is that tug-of-war between such diametrically opposed forces that a balance might be found which will benefit both parties. I heavily support the idea of unions if only because one employee stands exactly zero chance against a far better-funded employer. Only together can they pool enough resources to be a viable threat through which they can demand concessions. It is an admittedly simple argument, but that's roughly where I stand.

     For me, unions exist primarily as a force for justice...not for society at large, but in the workplace. They are a safeguard against abuses and a protector of employee loyalty. They force the employer to follow procedures rather than (sometimes arbitrary) dictatorial proclamations. They force the employer to treat his employees with respect. I really don't get how people can be so against that. It always strikes me as odd that people rail against teachers getting free health care and tenure...they want to take those benefits away from the teachers rather than asking the question, "How come I don't have that?"