What kind of reasoning is it to look for one or a few examples of individuals screwing up and then claiming it as a property of the species? I think we found more than one criminal company or CEO, but you would not use that as an example for how useless or even bad companies and CEOs are.
I would also have preferred that OP instead of pointing to the name of the source (and nothing else!) would at least have added something about the actual content of the linked article. It seems to me to be rarely justified to argue by just pointing at the source of the argument as if that is a counter argument to the actual argument that was made (which at that point remains unexplored and unknown, implying it's not even worth looking at it - but it was still worth formulating a comment?).
Switzerland is next to Germany, and has almost no union and there is not so much difference in overall standard of living and how workers are treated.
The idea that Unions are this universal good and talking negative about them is simply being anti-worker pro-capitalist exploitation is a tiered talking point.
- business owner
- absolute free market fetishists
- one bad experience cherry pickers
Just because you don't hear of it - or don't want to hear of it - doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
* Governments are frequently corrupt and when they are they should be reformed.
* Businesses are frequently corrupt and when they are they should be reformed.
* Unions are frequently corrupt. They should therefore not exist.
Realistically corruption is a feature of all human institutions. Unions are special only insofar as they are institutions that threaten rather than defend the wealth of the American ruling classes.
You can't realistically abolish businesses. An economy of just individual tradesmen all working independently cant come close to the efficiency gains a large business has and just straight up lack the capacity for large scale projects and R&D. It's going to lead to the same outcome as your government being abolished and then businesses being reinstated.
Listed alongside the other two, the special thing about unions is they don't have this "you just straight up cant get rid of them and keep them gone" factor. So I think its completely reasonable for a person very concerned with corruption to take reform, reform, get rid of them stances respectively. Remove the institutions you can and fight corruption in the ones you cant.
You can abolish businesses too. The 2nd largest economy from 1950-1970 did precisely that, TINA propaganda notwithstanding. Chinese SOEs also serve as a model for a business that isnt really a business. It's great if you're on the central committee.
You can abolish unions as well. The results also arent exactly pleasant for the 90% of people who rely on selling their labor to survive.
But it's fucking great for that top 10% if they dont exist.
The only solution is to maintain and expand democratic decision making from within. An organization that claims to be about the people, its members, absolutely has to be run by those people directly.
And even such general things such as negotiating pay will only be good for the lower performers, anyone who is a high performer will be better off negotiating their own salary.