Unfortunately, with larger unions, or those with weaker consciousness and mis-perceptions of what a union is supposed to be - there's alienation between the member worker on one hand and the union and its operatives on the other, and then dues payment seems to be something transactional: "What will you get me in exchange for what I pay you?"
This probably wouldn't translate well to software. But it works great if you are installing ducts. Same goes for plumbers and electricians. My sisters first husband was a union electrician. That is why I looked into getting a union gig. I hate job hunting.
In the years I did it I worked for five different companies. I didn't have to run around dropping off resumes and doing practice tests. I just got a call from the union and was told where to go to work. And I made significantly more than my non-union counterparts. Easily more than the dues I had to pay.
Unions don't sell themselves to companies in the first place.
The same reason your criminal defense attorney doesn't sell themselves to the public prosecutor's office.
No, I'm implying that working for an actor’s counterparty compromises your ability to represent that actor in adversarial interactions with the same counterparty, which is a core function of unions with respect to employers as it is with defense attorneys with respect to prosecutors.
> companies certainly have the option to hire employees that do not work for unions.
Not in the US; even where union shops are prohibited by state right-to-work laws, adverse employment decisions on the basis of union membership or union-related activity by an employer are prohibited by the National Labor Relations Act. That is, in some cases, employers are allowed to hire employees who aren't members of a union, but they aren't legally permitted to hire employees because (even in part) they aren't members of unions.
In the US, do you think companies have not moved manufacturing from union plants to non-union plants? Do you think they have not moved manufacturing out of US plants? Do you think this does not have to do with union membership?
I believe the adversarial view of unions and employers results in inefficiency and waste. I was suggesting an alternative view of unions and employers, but I believe I now understand you: you think this is impossible.
Unions (or their leadership) perceived as serving management are removed, invariably and swiftly, by their constituents, whether through decertification or leadership elections.
If you try to UBER union electricians you are probably going to be in for a rude awakening.
What's the rude awakening that I should expect?
Put it this way, when I worked at startups that owed me a raise they couldn't afford, I've offered several times to take a 0% raise in exchange for a 10% reduction in hours. Not a single company has taken that offer and several thought I was trying to be funny.
I was not.