Opposition to trade unions: Difference between revisions

Help

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 23:33, 1 February 2023

Redirect to:

Trade union#Impact

This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:

To a section: This is a redirect from a topic that does not have its own page to a section of a page on the subject. For redirects to embedded anchors on a page, use {{R to anchor}} instead.

With history: This is a redirect from a page containing substantive page history. This page is kept as a redirect to preserve its former content and attributions. Please do not remove the tag that generates this text (unless the need to recreate content on this page has been demonstrated), nor delete this page.
- This template should not be used for redirects having some edit history but no meaningful content in their previous versions, nor for redirects created as a result of a page merge (use {{R from merge}} instead), nor for redirects from a title that forms a historic part of Wikipedia (use {{R with old history}} instead).

With possibilities: This is a redirect from a title that potentially could be expanded into a new article or other type of associated page such as a new template. The topic described by this title may be more detailed than is currently provided on the target page or in a section of that page.
- When the target page becomes too large, or for any reason a new page would be an improvement, this redirect may be replaced with an article, template or other project page that is carved out of the target page. See also {{R to section}} and use together with this rcat when appropriate.
- If the topic of the redirect is not susceptible to expansion, then use other rcats such as {{R to section}} or {{R to list entry}} when appropriate.
- Since a new page may be created, links to this redirect should not be replaced with a direct link to the target page. To make redirects to this page, use {{R avoided double redirect}}.
- {{R printworthy}} should be used together with this template when applied to a redirect in mainspace.
- When used on a template redirect, it will automatically populate Category:Template redirects with possibilities.

From a cross-project redirect: This is a redirect from a title linked to an item on Wikidata. The Wikidata item linked to this page is Opposition to trade unions (Q2853397).
- Use this template only on hard redirects – for soft redirects use {{Soft redirect with Wikidata item}}.

When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Opposition_to_trade_unions&oldid=1136939024"

Hidden categories:

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+#REDIRECT [[Trade union#Impact]]
-{{Use American English|date = February 2019}}
+{{Redirect category shell|
-{{Short description|Political views}}
+{{R to section}}
-{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2011}}
+{{R with history}}
-{{Lead too short|date=September 2016}}
+{{R with possibilities}}
-'''Opposition to [[trade union]]s''' comes from a variety of groups in society and there are many different types of argument on which this opposition is based.
+{{R with Wikidata item}}
+}}
-==Economic effects==
-===Unemployment===
-The economist [[Milton Friedman]], advocate of [[laissez-faire]] capitalism, believed that [[unionization]] frequently produces higher wages at the expense of fewer jobs, and that, if some industries are unionized while others are not, wages will decline in non-unionized industries.<ref>Milton & Rose Friedman, ''[[Free to Choose]]''. Chicago Press, 1979</ref>
-By raising the price of labor, the [[wage rate]], above the [[equilibrium price]], unemployment rises. This is because it is no longer worthwhile for businesses to employ those laborers whose work is worth less than the minimum wage rate set by the unions.<ref>Alain Anderton, ''Economics'', Fourth edition</ref>
-Trade unions often benefit ''insider'' workers, those having a secure job and high productivity, at the cost of ''outsider'' workers, consumers of the goods or services produced, and the shareholders of the unionized business. The ones who are likely to lose the most from a trade union are those who are unemployed or at the risk of unemployment or who are not able to get the job that they want in a particular field.<ref>''Economics'', 16th edition, Samuelson Nordhaus</ref>{{page needed|date=July 2013}} It is argued that over the long term, unions reduce investment in a business, which in turn makes that business less competitive and over the long run will therefore reduce employment in unionized industries. In addition, unions can also cause slower job growth (3 to 4%) for unionized workplaces as opposed to non-unionized workplaces.<ref name="auto">Sherk, James [https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/what-unions-do-how-labor-unions-affect-jobs-and-the-economy#_ftn9 "What Unions Do: How Labor Unions Affect Jobs and the Economy"], ''The Heritage Foundation'', 21/05/19, accessed 01/03/19</ref>
-Unions can also increase jobs losses, with James Sherk arguing that at newly organized workplaces, employment can fall from between 5 and 10%. Sherk notes that some studies find no effect on employment but argues that these tend to focus on workplaces where unionization had little effect of any kind at all, meaning that jobs did not disappear but wages did not rise either, which for Sherk means that these studies cannot be used to argue against unions causing job losses.<ref name="auto"/> However, Sherk also argues that there is no evidence that unions increase the risk of bankruptcy for unionized firms, noting that unions try to avoid ruining the companies they organize at and will make concessions to keep distressed firms afloat, generally by agreeing to layoffs for newer workers in order to maintain wages for more senior ones.<ref name="auto"/>
-===Harm to ununionized labor===
-Advocates of unions claim that the higher wages that unions demand can be paid for through company profits.{{Citation needed|date=July 2013}} However, as Milton Friedman pointed out, profits are only very rarely high enough. 80% of national income is wages, and only about 6% is profits after tax, providing very little room for higher wages, even if profits could be totally used up. Moreover, profits are invested leading to an increase in capital: which raises the value of labor, increasing wages. If profits were totally removed, this source of wage increase would be removed.<ref>Milton & Rose Friedman, ''Free to Choose'', 1979</ref>
-According to ''The New York Times'', wages in 2012 fell to a record low of 43.5 percent of [[Gross domestic product|GDP]].<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sunday-review/americas-productivity-climbs-but-wages-stagnate.html|title=Our Economic Pickle|first=Steven|last=Greenhouse|date=12 January 2013|accessdate=30 July 2019|newspaper=The New York Times}}</ref>
-===Efficiency===
-[[Friedrich Hayek]] argued that the effect of union activities to influence pricing is potentially very harmful, making the market system ineffective.<ref name="Hayek">F. A. Hayek, ''The Constitution of Liberty'', 1960 Routledge Classics</ref>{{page needed|date=July 2013}}
-James Sherk argues that unions generally reduce a businesses' profits by about 10 to 15%, though Sherk notes this is more common in firms that have a competitive advantage (it is hard for unions to reduce profits in a competitive market), as this means these firms have higher than normal profitability, so this redistribution does not risk scaring away investors. However, reducing business profits does reduce the money available for a business to launch new investments.<ref name="auto"/>
-Unions may also hamper recovery from economic recessions and depressions, as they reduce profitability and thus deter the investment required for recovery. James Sherk argues that American states with greater rates of unionization took longer to recover from the 1982 and 1991 recessions, as well as arguing that the unionization that was encouraged under the policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression actually contributed to reducing the speed of recovery during the period.<ref name="auto"/>
-===Cost-push inflation===
-By causing wage increases above the market rate, unions increase the cost to businesses, causing them to raise their prices, leading to a [[inflation|general increase in the price level]].<ref name="Hayek"/> [[Austrian School|Austrian economists]] such as [[Robert P. Murphy]], however, dispute this, arguing that the increase in the cost of labor simply means that less of other goods can be bought. He writes:
-<blockquote>If unions succeed in wage hikes, and employers raise the prices they charge consumers to maintain their own profit margins, and the supply of money remains the same, then something else has to "give." Either the prices of goods and services in nonunion sectors have to fall and offset the union sector hikes, or people's cash balances need to fall, in terms of their purchasing power.<ref>{{cite web |author=Robert P. Murphy |url=http://www.mises.org/story/2839 |title=Can Unions Cause Price Inflation? |publisher=[[Mises Institute]] |accessdate=18 October 2011|date=6 January 2008 }}</ref></blockquote>
-===Corruption===
-Some trade unions, such as the [[Teamsters#Influence of organized crime|Teamsters]], have been criticized for involvement with [[organized crime]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Fitch|first=Robert|title=Solidarity for Sale: How Corruption Destroyed the Labor Movement and Undermined American Promise|year=2006|publisher=PublicAffairs|pages=134–55}}</ref>
-===General response to economic arguments===
-The argument that unionized workers raise their own wages above their natural rate at the expense of their businesses or other workers assumes that unions never raise productivity to compensate for higher wages. Unions are capable of raising productivity by reducing turnover, by increasing coordination between workers and management, and by increasing workers' motivation.<ref name="autogenerated1">{{Cite web|url=http://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/staff/|title=CEP &#124; Staff|website=cep.lse.ac.uk|accessdate=30 July 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/why/uniondifference/uniondiff8.cfm |title=Unions Are Good for Business, Productivity and the Economy |publisher=Aflcio.org |accessdate=18 October 2011 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20111211064646/http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/why/uniondifference/uniondiff8.cfm |archivedate=11 December 2011 |df=dmy-all }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1153/is_v108/ai_3579390/ |title=Union productivity effects &#124; Monthly Labor Review |publisher=Find Articles |accessdate=18 October 2011 |year=1985 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120107232744/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1153/is_v108/ai_3579390/ |archivedate= 7 January 2012 }}</ref> Many unions raise the productivity of their workers, and some even raise it enough to make up for wage increases.<ref name="autogenerated1"/>
-Another argument raised by union supporters is that unionized workers will spend their higher wages, driving economic growth and creating new jobs.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/news/2009/02/18/5597/unions-are-good-for-the-american-economy-2/|title=Unions Are Good for the American Economy|first1=David|last1=Madl|first2=Karla|last2=Walter|date=18 February 2009|website=Center for American Progress Action|accessdate=30 July 2019}}</ref> Union opponents respond that this is an example of the [[broken window fallacy]]; union supporters assume that money is more valuable in the hands of unionized workers than in the hands of whoever else would obtain it in the union's absence. There is some evidence that this is not a fallacy, as greater [[wealth equality]] seems to be correlated with greater economic growth.<ref name=OstryBerg>Andrew Berg and Jonathan D. Ostry, 2011, "[http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2011/sdn1108.pdf Inequality and Unsustainable Growth: Two Sides of the Same Coin]?" IMF Staff Discussion Note SDN/11/08, [[International Monetary Fund]]</ref> Union supporters counter that unions, if organized without violence or government help, are part of the free market; if unions can win higher wages for their workers without coercion, those wages are legitimate.<ref name="autogenerated2">http://c4ss.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/C4SS-Labor.pdf</ref>
-Research indicates that unions may reduce the risk of a stock price crash for a business by deterring risk-taking and over-investment, as well as increasing information transparency.<ref>[https://ssrn.com/abstract=3394379 Kim, Jeong-Bon and Zhang, Eliza Xia and Zhong, Kai, The Bright Side of Unionization: The Case of Stock Price Crash Risk (May 25, 2019). Available at SSRN]</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.2139/ssrn.3394379|title = The Bright Side of Unionization: The Case of Stock Price Crash Risk|year = 2019|last1 = Kim|first1 = Jeong-Bon|last2 = Zhang|first2 = Eliza Xia|last3 = Zhong|first3 = Kai}}</ref>
-===Social disruption===
-[[Trade unions]] take strike actions that result in the disruption of public services<ref>http://journals.sfu.ca/archivar/index.php/archivaria/article/viewFile/10489/11328</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.indiatogether.org/combatlaw/vol2/issue6/strike.htm |title=Critique of SC's ruling on the right to strike, from Volume 2, Issue 6, of Combat Law |publisher=Indiatogether.org |accessdate=18 October 2011}}</ref> – as demonstrated in the 1978–79 British [[Winter of Discontent]].<ref>{{cite journal |title=Chronicles of a Death Foretold: the Winter of Discontent and Construction of the Crisis of British Keynesianism |author=Colin Hay |journal=Parliamentary Affairs |year=2010 |volume=63 |pages=446–70 |doi=10.1093/pa/gsp056 |issue=3}}</ref> However, where applicable, this may be logically inferred to be the very purpose of strike action ''per se''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hawaiifreepress.com/main/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/1360/Furlough-negotiations-50M-ransom-offered-but-unions-balk-at-releasing-hostages.aspx |title=Furlough negotiations: $50M ransom offered, but unions balk at releasing hostages |publisher=Hawaii Free Press |accessdate=18 October 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/unions-will-hold-us-all-to-ransom-1820400.html | work=Irish Independent | title=Unions will hold us all to ransom | date=14 July 2009}}</ref>
-In some cases, unions' strike have led to violent clashes with police and with strikebreakers. See the article on the [[UK miners' strike (1984–1985)#Violence|UK miners' strike of the 1980s]].
-==Challenges from affirmative action perspectives==
-===Racist policies in the past===
-A consequence of unions' zeal to guard their special interests is that some unions have actively lobbied for racist and anti-immigration policies. An example is the creation of the notorious [[Asiatic Exclusion League]], which was composed mainly of the various labor unions. The ''Pictorial History of American Labor'' observes,
-<blockquote>The early A.F. of L. did not draw the color line, but expressed an "ideal of solidarity irrespective of race." Before long, however, the feeling changed. Whether a tendency to exclude black workers from craft unions was based more on fear of competition or racial prejudice carried over from slave days, it is difficult to decide. But the developing exclusion of the Negro worker from many neighbor unions brought with it serious problems—not just for the black worker seeking job security, but for the white worker seeking the same end...<br>
-The record shows that black workers...have been used to break strikes. This availability has usually ended when the black worker has been shown that the union is open to black as well as white.<ref name="Cahn_160">''A Pictorial History of American Labor'', William Cahn, 1972, p. 160.</ref></blockquote>
-However, in a study called ''The Black Worker'', Spero and Harris observe that more strikes [in American labor history] have been broken by white workers than by black workers.<ref name="Cahn_160"/> Most blacks were barred from membership in the AFL not because of their skin color, but because they never had a chance to learn a skill, and "most A.F. of L. unions did not admit unskilled mass-production workers."<ref>''A Pictorial History of American Labor'', William Cahn, 1972, p. 231.</ref> While the [[AFL-CIO]] is the modern version of the AFL, it is much more open to membership by women, immigrants, and different nationalities. Other unions, such as the [[Industrial Workers of the World]] and the [[International Longshore and Warehouse Union]], were created without regard to race from the very start.<ref>''Solidarity Forever – An oral history of the IWW'', Stewart Bird, Dan Georgakas, [[Deborah Shaffer]], 1985, p. 140.</ref>
-== Government ==
-[[File:Illegal Union Firing 1952 - 2007.svg|thumb|Illegal union firing increased during the [[Reagan administration]] and has continued since.<ref>[http://www.businessweek.com/archives/1994/b337360.arc.htm "Why America Needs Unions"], ''BusinessWeek''</ref>]]
-Specific countries, especially undemocratic countries, while still having unions in ''name'', do not allow for independent trade unions, just as they rarely allow for independent businesses. These state-run trade unions do not function in the same way as independent trade unions and generally do not hold any kind of collective bargaining power, acting to ensure the smooth running of Government industry.{{Citation needed|date=April 2007}}
-Attempts to reduce the effects of trade unions may include [[union busting]] activities by private [[company|companies]] or state action including governments of authoritarian regimes such as in [[Adolf Hitler]]'s Nazi Germany<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/fight/sfeature/sf_nazis_02.html |title=American Experience &#124; The Fight &#124; Nazis in the News |publisher=PBS |accessdate=18 October 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.colby.edu/personal/r/rmscheck/GermanyE1.html |title=E: The Third Reich |publisher=Colby.edu |accessdate=18 October 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://pmaci.customer.netspace.net.au/ncop.htm |title=The Creation Of A Fascist Dictatorship / Totalitarian State In Germany |publisher=Pmaci.customer.netspace.net.au |date=27 February 1933 |accessdate=18 October 2011 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20111004121038/http://pmaci.customer.netspace.net.au/ncop.htm |archivedate=4 October 2011 |df=dmy-all }}</ref> and Burma's military dictator, [[Ne Win]]. Many democratic governments have also attempted to limit the effects of unions, although success has been mixed.
-It has been argued, particularly by market anarchists, that government intervention in the economy has been decidedly anti-union, even in economies like the United States or the European Union. [[Kevin Carson]] maintains that the most effective union tactics are either criminalized or displaced by state policy in most countries. Trade unions established themselves through [[sitdown strike]]s, [[sympathy strikes]], [[secondary boycotts]], and hot cargo agreements; these tactics are all illegal in most industrialized countries. Similarly, the original unions doubled as social welfare organization, using union funds to provide healthcare and pensions to workers and welfare to the unemployed. By adopting various welfare-state measures, governments made the populace less dependent on unions.<ref name="autogenerated2"/>
-==Left critiques of trade unionism==
-[[File:Anti-union ASF flyer.jpg|thumb|An [[anarcho-syndicalism|anarcho-syndicalist]] flyer exhorting workers to "Give Union Bosses the Flick!"]]
-The political left is often associated with support for trade unionism. However, some groups and individuals have taken a less positive view. In the nineteenth century, a belief in the [[iron law of wages]] led some socialists to reject trade unionism and strike action as ineffective. In this view, any increase in wages would lead manufacturers to raise ''prices'' leaving workers no better off in real terms. [[Karl Marx]] wrote a pamphlet, "[[Wages, Price and Profit]]", to counter this idea, which had been put forward in the [[International Workingmen's Association]] by a follower of [[Robert Owen]].
-Some early [[social democracy|Social Democrats]] were also skeptical of trade unionism. Usual criticisms were that unions split workers into sections rather than organising them as a class; that they were dominated by relatively privileged skilled workers who were mainly concerned to defend their sectional interests; and that industrial action and organisation were incapable of bringing about fundamental social change. [[H. M. Hyndman]] of the [[Social Democratic Federation]] summed up some of these views when he wrote in ''The Historical Basis of Socialism in England'' (1883):
-:"Trade Unions ... constitute an aristocracy of labour who [are] ... a hindrance to that complete organisation of the proletariat which alone can obtain for the workers their proper control over their own labour ... Being also ... unsectarian and unpolitical, they prevent any organised attempt being made by the workers as a class to form a definite party of their own, apart from existing factions, with a view to dominate the social conditions – a victory which ... can only be gained by resolute political action."
-Hyndman went on to urge workers to devote "the Trade Union funds wasted on strikes or petty funds" instead to the building up of a strong Socialist Party on the German model. Other social democrats however were more convinced than Hyndman of the utility of Trade Union action.
-Trade unionism is criticised by those of [[council communism|council communist]] and [[left communism|left communist]] tendencies.<ref>"Unions Against the Working Class", International Communist Current http://en.internationalism.org/pamphlets/unions.htm</ref> Here, trade unionism is seen as being more useful to capitalists than to workers, and as a kind of "safety-valve" that helps to keep working-class discontent within reformist channels and prevent it from evolving into revolutionary action. They consider a global state composed of [[workers' council]]s to be the ultimate union to which all workers in the world belong; unions that organize based on trade further divide the working class and act as a mechanism to allow the working class to vent concerns without actually uniting and becoming revolutionary. In contrast to other left critiques of trade unionism, these tendencies do not accept that the problems they identify could be remedied by changing the structure, leadership or objectives of trade unions. They argue that trade unionism is inherently reformist because it is sectarian and is not founded in the workplace itself and that revolutionary action is possible only if workers act outside trade unionism through [[soviet (council)|workers' councils]] or other channels.
-There is also a philosophical difference between the [[craft unionism]] of many AFL-type unions, and the [[industrial unionism]] of organizations such as the Industrial Workers of the World. Industrial unionists decry a practice that they call "union scabbing," in which craft unionists are required by the no-strike clause in their contracts to cross the picket lines of other unions.<ref>''Roughneck: The Life and Times of Big Bill Haywood''. Peter Carlson, 1983, p. 80.</ref>
-There is also the left critique of the tendencies of some labor unions to become [[bureaucracy|bureaucratic]] and for the union leaders and staff to become detached from the needs and interests of the [[wikt:rank and file|rank and file]] union members, in contrast to the practices of [[union democracy]]. The [[Labor Notes (organization)|Labor Notes]], in the United States, is an example of an organization that attempts to fight this bureaucratic tendency.
-== See also ==
-{{Portal|Organized labour}}
-'''Violence:'''
-* [[Union violence]]
-* [[Anti-union violence]]
-* [[United States v. Enmons]]
-* [[Freedom from Union Violence Act]]
-* [[Wagner Act]]
-==References==
-*[[Joseph Stiglitz]] (2002). [https://web.archive.org/web/20060725114900/http://www2.gsb.columbia.edu/faculty/jstiglitz/download/2002_Emploi_justice_sociale.pdf ''Employment, social justice and societal well-being''] International Labour Review, 141 (1–2), p.&nbsp;9 – 29.
-*Business Standard (2014). [http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ani/international-trade-unions-need-to-be-less-combative-encourage-more-interaction-with-workers-114122600503_1.html International trade unions need to be less combative,encourage more interaction with workers]
-==Notes==
-{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}
-==External links==
-*{{cite journal|url=https://mises.org/library/union-myth |title=The free market - the union myth|author= Thomas J. DiLorenzo|journal=The Free Market 24, No. 10 |date=October 2004|via= [[Mises Institute]]}}
-{{Organized labor}}
-[[Category:Labor relations]]
-[[Category:Trade unions]]
-[[Category:Criticism of trade unions]]