Every worker in the US should be free to unionize if they want to be in a union.
I don't.
Don't tell me what to do.
I don't.
Don't tell me what to do.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_productivity_and_...
https://www.epi.org/publication/how-todays-unions-help-worki...
Folks who say "I like things the way they are" when things are terrible the way they are aren't going to change their mind, and it is an inefficient use of time to try to convince them otherwise. Organize and vote, and ignore the hardliners. Business as usual will led to only more business as usual [1].
The question is whether that's where we want to ethically go as society, not whether the Collective has the might.
Let's get back on track: Americans overwhelmingly clearly need unions because employment and contract laws do not protect individuals (including those self-employed) anywhere near to the degree that it protects groups covered by collective agreement contracts.
When we drill down, what I suspect we'll find is that what you oppose is having to sacrifice part of your salary for something you won't reap the benefits of. And that'd be a fair concern: America has a huge wage problem that's only been getting worse over the last half-century, where some jobs are now decadently overpaid, while most jobs are criminally underpaid as to not even be a living wage despite full time employment.
So here's the irony: the only two ways to solve that problem are to enact laws that force companies into paying true living wages, which we can comfortably say cannot happen given the farce that is US politics, or through collective agreements that force companies into paying fair wages because they won't have a workforce if they don't. Which requires unions.
With the ultimate irony of course being that the only way to make sure those union don't forget about your needs (e.g. ensuring enough salary bands so you won't go down in pay, ensuring the due scheme is fair, ensuring there are clear restrictions on how the dues get spent so that being the head of the union isn't a retirement plan of its own) is to join one and help steer it through active participation.
Exclusive representation IS government coercion! Unless you're in a right-to-work state, the government forbids an employee from working for an employer outside a union, if the workforce is unionized. And the only way the government enforces any rule is, when push comes to shove, the threat of violence if you break the rules. That's the point of government!
re financials: I think you should "ask", rather than "suspect". And no, this is not primarily financial. Yes, I want to get more money for working harder and better (I am human), but we have a mechanism for redistributing money — taxes. They work! We should use them to achieve societal goals, instead of forcing financial balance by strictly regimenting job roles and pay grades.
What I primarily want is to be effective at doing a high-skill job I enjoy and feel is valuable. That means taking on responsibilities outside my JD and fundamentally answering only to my employer, not to a committee coworkers, many of whom couldn't care less about actually getting work done.
Rather than individual exceptionalism, the combination of billions of people around the world willing to work for less, technological advances in transportation and automation, and foreign governments being more open to look the other way on environmental concerns led to the decline in the power of unions in the US.
There was a labor and environmental price arbitrage opportunity, and it was going to equalize sooner or later.
If anything it might be advantageous because companies might prefer working with freelancers anyways. More opportunity.
Even if you get a little more as a freelancer, workers in general have not benefitted appropriately from the productivity increase since the 70s.
If you have a rare skill it may work out okay, but woo you if you ever become sick or disabled.
I know, because I lived through it but came to see the light after I found out that UAW workers are practically the only decent-earning blue collar workers in the U.S.
Ethically: I do not want a committee of mediocre coworkers telling me what responsibilities I am allowed to do 8 hours a day.
I would feel differently if I was a janitor, of course. So janitors should unionize! But I am a well-compensated software engineer and I have no interest in that employment structure.
And I've definitely heard of non unionised companies with rigid roles like that where the middle managers liked having defined roles with little room for taking on additional responsibilities.
The difference between the two IMO is if the union has shit representatives you _can_ work with colleagues to get a different union rep as it's democratic when implemented correctly, whereas with a crap management you only have the option of moving job, so at least with a more unionised workforce you can do both.
I seriously doubt they are members of a significant American labor union.