>I grew up in a union household. My father was a member of an airline pilots union and my mother was a member of (23 years) and president of (17 years) the teachers union in our town. Unions kept my parent's gainfully employed for decades.

"I'm not racist, I have black friends" applied to labor.

The only reason unions exist is to protect the jobs of the union at the expense of the whole economy through collective bargaining and striking when leverage exists. If it's not doing that, it's not a union, it's a professional club.

When you say:

>I understand that automation costs jobs and a union's primary responsibility is to protect the jobs of its members but what are we really supposed to do here? Continue with antiquated processes that affect an entire economy just to protect the jobs of a relatively small number of people?

If you're pro-union, the answer is yes, categorically. You don't get to decide whether their demands are reasonable or not. It's their union and their industry. You support them if they decide to strike.

If you don't, well, that's your right, but it puts you outside the camp of labor and being pro-union.

Being pro-union between strikes is like being a pacifist between wars. Cheap, unprincipled, and contemptible.