Are Unions to blame for the lack of Manufacturing jobs?

[NetxMan]

What is your take on this?

I think they have but would like to hear some opions first.

[KWJams]

that Unions are a major reason, but not the only reason.

Government regulations that stifle productivity is a big part as well as the dreaded union worker mentality of -- hey it's not my job. :rolleyes:

[gopman]

less restrictive business climates in foreign nations are siphening manufacturing jobs from the USA. The only logical way to solve this problem- less restrictive business climate in the US, i.e. lower taxes, less government regulation. Sure we can tell companies not to pollute, but how does it help the environment if they can just go pollute even worse somewhere else?

Would someone explain how unions are creating a problem? I am unfamilliar with that situation.

[KWJams]

Partly because Unions offer their support as a block of votes for which ever politician is wiling to prostitute themselves for what the Unions consider their collective best interest.

[Blueangel]

Originally posted by KWJams
Partly because Unions offer their support as a block of votes for which ever politician is wiling to prostitute themselves for what the Unions consider their collective best interest. Is that still the case in the U.S.?
I was very recently made redundant from a job where I had been a Union Rep for six years ( I hasten to add, I wanted to leave as I'd had enough of the way my employer treats employees). When I was first elected, I stood alone as the only rep who didn't vote Labour. Thankfully, by the time I left, there was a healthy proportion of Liberal reps whose opinions were not entrenched in the old style of union activity.
Even so, I very often found myself at logger heads with my own union...especially the older union leaders whose attitude was very old-school and (I believe) not appropriate to today's society.

The main problem I encountered is, I believe a union rep's purpose is to protect jobs and the rights of the individual in the workplace. The unions believe that they should protect jobs and act on the wishes of the majority vote of their members.
Therein lies the rub.

There is precious little that U.K. unions can do to prevent manufacturing jobs being farmed out to overseas companies.
Any unresolved dispute tween Employer and Union, has to be referred to ACAS for a final and legally binding decision. ACAS is a government body and can either be your greatest ally or a proverbial brick wall.
If the Union disagree with an ACAS decision and the members propose strike action, any resulting strike is deemed illegal.

The only stick a Union has to wield is to resist redundancies caused by companies shipping manufacturing jobs abroad.
It is up to the unions to point out the damage to a companies reputation that compulsary redundancies would cause.
But again, the cards are stacked in the Employers favour.
As long as they offer 'suitable alternative work' to any employee threatened with redundancy, there is little the unions can do.
If an employee rejects an offer of suitable alternative work, the law regards them as having put themselves out of work and they lose the right to redundancy pay and unemploymant benefits.

That is how we end up with manufacturing jobs going abroad, whilst we are left with the cleanest despatch depots in Europe.

It is up to government to penalise employers who move these jobs abroad.
It is also up to the share holders to stand firm on the ethical issues raised by losing manufacturing jobs...but they are usually to busy studying their profit margins.

[NetxMan]

Unions also artificially inflate wages.

[dandmasc]

I was VP of Operations of a computer company here in the USA. Much of the gyrations that went on from quarter to quarter was based upon bottom line. Management would layoff (redundancy) employees to artificially inflate the bottom line. Stockholders demanded more and more profit, so, in order to satisfy the greed of the stockholder, manufacturing was let to Asian countries, where labor was cheap. The question is, which came first; the stockholder greed for greater returns, or the laborer greed for wanting higher wages. Seems to me it is Chicken or Egg syndrome. I fought to see that manufacturing jobs remained at home, but in the end, I was considered a threat, so, at age 55, I was layed off. Life's a great deal better for me personally without all the political hassle now.

[Blueangel]

Originally posted by dandmasc
I fought to see that manufacturing jobs remained at home, but in the end, I was considered a threat, so, at age 55, I was layed off. Life's a great deal better for me personally without all the political hassle now. Oooo! I second that!


A month into my redundancy, I stay up late at night because I can and not because I'm working a 60 hour week, then plowing through a mountain of union paperwork at silly o'clock in the morning when I get home.
I no longer have my workmates phoning me for hours and on the verge of tears, because of how management have treated them.
These days, they phone me to say how thoroughly glad they are having left their job.
I can sleep soundly knowing that I did my best and that everyone who wanted to stay at my workplace, still has a job. The five of us who left, all desperately wanted to go. That's not a bad result when you consider that my workplace was just one branch of a multi-national company, and our site was home to 650 staff and 6 unions.
Before people criticise the unions, they should realise that we are all democratically elected. The job can be very stressful and the vast majority of reps receive no extra pay for these duties.

I had quite a decent relationship with my general manager.
He publically called me 'a maverick with a death wish'.
At least he recognised my good points :p

[Blueangel]

Originally posted by NetxMan
Unions also artifically inflate wages. Hmmm...
Do you not have a legal minimum wage in the States?

I've found in the past that the public have a common misunderstanding about wage rises.
When the press reports wage increases, it often fails to explain that wage rises are based on base line inflation(bank and mortgage interest rates) and not topline inflation rates (consumer and utility price increases).
Therefore, whilst the union member may be paying 9+% inflation on his household bills and shopping, the employer will only offer 1% above a baseline rate of 2.5%.
In effect, even though the union secures a wage increase, it falls a long way short of meeting the increased cost of living.

At the end of the day, western employees can't compete with well-educated staff from developing countries, who are happy to work for a quarter of what we need to live on.

I've been on a wage negotiation committee and the double-dealing and blackmail that goes on, would shock most people.
I once sat through the first two hours of such a meeting in total silence. I wanted to take it all in and understand the undercurrents. I only spoke up when one manager physically assaulted another for contadicting him.

[NetxMan]

They artificially inflate wages, thereby limiting employment opportunities in their particular field, while at the same time creating a huge surplus of workers trained in that field in the expectation that they too can find work at the artificially high wages. This is precisely the situation in the teaching field today, artificially high wages, and a huge surplus of trained teachers looking for work. It is a buyers market, which should translate into lower costs.

[Blueangel]

You've got spare teachers?!!
Send them over here!

I've not checked your location, but you can't be from the U.K. as we have a chronic shortage of qualified teachers, doctors and nurses.

[up2date]

Perhaps, NetxMan, in your region that is the case regarding teachers. Here in the northeast, however, they practically beg people to become teachers. And our teacher's salaries are not at all artificially inflated. They are considered quite low which is one of the main reasons there is a lack.

[dandmasc]

Very good Up2date. We could use a few more teachers here in Alabama as well.

My daughter-in-law is a school teacher here. But because of lack of funding, many teachers in this locale will be laid-off next year.

[NetxMan]

I think this deserves a new thread but do you think that raising the teachers salaries will actually help? I know history for the last few years as shown it hasn't, but I think it is a combination of parental responsibility and the qualitiy of teachers now. And I blame some of the teacher quality to Teacher Unions.

[steve_in_mich]

Teacher salaries vary widely from state to state.

Here in Michigan the teachers are very well paid (2nd highest in the nation) and the teachers' union is very powerful.

In the county that I live in teachers do not pay any portion of their health care premiums. Their health care premium is approximately 20% higher than the average health plan in the county. The reason I mention this is because there are several contentious contract negotiations going on and the union has stated that they will not pay health care premiums. As a nice side note the teachers' health care administrator is associated with their own union.

To answer the initial question - yes I do believe that unions are causing a big problem in this country. There is no way that GM and Ford will stay in business unless there are significant labor changes in the future.

[azov]

Unions do not artificially inflate wages. Wages are artificially depressed by employers. Unions attempt to bring them up closer to actual value of production, but of course this cuts into employers' profits - hence union demands are "excessive" and "unreasonable."

Workers need the freedom to set their own pay rates - just like doctors and lawyers. Either that, or such professions need salary caps. Either way, the so-called "free market" needs drastic perestroika.

[Missouri Mule]

"Wages are artificially depressed by employers."

Not all employers. Some are both reasonable and just. If you wanted to make a good case, then Wal-Mart would be the best target. But they use the courts to tie up everything. They have the deepest pockets of all and won't give an inch.

[obmar]

Guess the asians outsmarted everyone else in manufacturing.
get less for more.

[gopman]

Labor is one of the most competetive markets in the economy. That means that with no interference, the price is naturally set at the actual value of the labor. A price floor causes unemployment and an unnecessary cost to the firms. Unless many firms colluded to lower wages, which is illegal, then prices for labor are fine where they are naturally.

[Missouri Mule]

It is important to understand that social costs that are passed along to employers such as SSA taxes that are deducted from the employee's income. That is to say the FICA tax is not 7.15%, it is actually 15.3%. The employer simply pays lower wages than they otherwise would do. Labor is a cost of doing business.