Weakening unions seems to have caused much more damage than whatever evils they were accused of (profligate compensation for unproductive workers)
If you've ever worked somewhere you couldn't change a lightbulb on your own, or carry a small box of materials to another building, plug in an appliance, or similar you quickly get a dim view of their value.
I'm not saying all are bad, but the bad ones...are really bad.
My wife is a member of a nurses union and it is nice to have a contract with your employer (something all top executives have) instead of work conditions being at the whim of a manager.
A downside of most contracts is there is little room for performance bonuses - almost all contracts are based on time in the union and not performance. The effect is an A player and a D player all get the same wages and benefits. There is no reason a union contract has to be structured this way, but for some reason they almost always are based on time and not performance.
For union leadership, this has the great perk of more or less aligning incentives among members. This works as long as a sizable chunk of members don't start to see themselves as equipped to do significantly better than their supposed-peer.
And, well, as soon as you do performance pay it means someone's going to lose out, because now workers are competing with each other. And this definitely aligns incentives away from where the union leadership wants them.
Isn't the nurse at work if they're sufficiently sick?
(That thought occurred to me reading this and I found it somewhat amusing.)
I have been forced to sit in company meetings where they help drive the anti-union message home every time there is the slightest talk about organizing. Have you had one? I am curious how wide the practice is.
I used to work in healthcare, which could really use some representation too.