Or maybe it's you who has fallen for propaganda. I think it's most likely that they know their own interests better than you do.
I wonder if the rather abhorrent means of union busting has led to an extreme reaction of causing passer bys to take a cartoonish slant, as though unions can only do good in the world and only if they can overcome evil corporate interest. Unions have some clear advantages, but are far from a panacea of aligning interests for all parties.
This seems to me to be yet another fault line on which propagandists at the dials have managed to convince people to coalesce into tribes strong enough to use absolutist language where nuance is required.
Why ? I don't think unions forbid any direct negotiation. Or this is a US-thing ?
So no, unions are not in my personal interest. Though as I said, I can appreciate there are others who are less mobile or less inclined to negotiate as aggressively for whatever reason for whom they are useful. As long as unions don't get in my way (e.g. by mafia-style locking down an industry I want to work in) then I have no problem with them.
(it probably explains why it is difficult to have meaningful conversations and everybody attacks each other, if we have such radically different experiences and knowledge of union laws and procedures)
FWIW, from my experience, In North America, it is the whole point of a union that "everybody gets the same" --> pay scale in particular. To make it explicit - if I'm in a union, I know EXACTLY how much anybody in any particular position makes. I can look it up in the pay scale table. I know how much my teacher cousin makes, I know how much my government friend makes, I know how much anybody at my brother-in-law's factory makes, by looking at the pay scale table.
I would be eager to hear about other countries. Maybe unions are different in Europe or Asia or Africa etc. As I indicated above in a more detailed post, I am 100% supportive of unions in general, and have had 100% negative experience in North American unions in particular.
In germany, the union does not directly determine the pay rate. Membership in a union at a very fundamental level allows you to participate in the union activities, access to their resources (+) and the right to strike for work-related reasons (++). Unions can participate in the organization of the work place when there are sufficient union members in a company by forming a workers council (Betriebsrat), which must be involved in certain kinds of decisions, for example firing people. Forming a workers council is a deliberate act - union membership is required, but there’s not automatism. None of this limits the ability of each union members or employee to negotiate pay rates.
On the employers side, you optionally (+++) can negotiate (or join a pre-negotiated) Tarifvertrag which covers topics such as pay grades, work time etc. There’s for example the TvÖD (Tarifvetrag öffentlicher Dienst) which covers all employees of the state/local governments, teachers etc. There‘s the option to join a Arbeitgeberverband (employers union), which then can negotiate that contract with the unions, so that the employers side gets a better negotiating position. A Tarifvertrag can be declared as „allgemeingültig“ which means that it covers all employees in a certain sector and the employer must conform to it, whether they like it or not.
But even the Tarifvertrag only sets a minimum bar - every employee can negotiate better rates. Whether that succeeds is a question of its own - for example teachers usually can‘t negotiate a higher salary since their individual negotiating power against the state is veeeery limited. But that’s not a legal requirement or limit - übertariflich (above Tarif) is a common word found in job descriptions where the employees have more leverage.
That said, there’s still problem you can have in unions - nepotism, people using a union job to slack off, protecting employees that should be fired are things that happen. But those happen in every power structure - I’ve seen the same thing happen where „favorite“ employees have been shielded by their boss from negative consequences. So that’s a fairly unspecific point to hold against unions - at least the representatives are elected by the workers and egregious examples are usually purged sooner or later.
(+) for example legal advice and also legal services - my mother fought their employer over employment-related matters and the union sent their lawyer.
(++) only unions are allowed to organize a strike https://www.personalwissen.de/arbeitsrecht/mitbestimmung/gew...
(+++) optionally can include „my workers forced me by striking“
Not correct for any union job I've held, or even heard of.
> You are a top performer - go the exact route you've described - nobody will stop you.
I mean, I guess you could try this - or just go to a non-union shop and make real money if you are a top performer. Unions in the US are not made for top performers capable of advancing their careers rapidly. I think you will find plenty of people stopping you in this scenario.
If the subject in question somehow did manage to follow your advice and somehow get paid above their peers - from my direct personal experience I'd expect a very toxic workplace up to and including physical violence once the other members find out. You would be seen as a scab.
I still didn't hear how it prevents you from switching employers.
For example I worked with a school where the area management and the union set salaries and individual teachers could not negotiate on their own. I'd say that's pretty typical in unions. It's also the case in for example the NHS and British railways (topical at the moment.)
> I still didn't hear how it prevents you from switching employers.
Because I never said it did.
You definitely can try to ride all of the ups and downs your life has in store for you but if you’re unlucky, your life will have something that you can’t handle on your own.
For example, say you're a talented younger worker and the majority of the union votes for pay by seniority, that's going against your interests.