I’ve never been strictly for or against unions in all cases. But I will say that, within the industry that I currently work, I’ve worked for both a union and non-union shop, and my time in a union shop has been better paid, and I’ve felt greater job satisfaction.
To get the full experience you'd need to work for an industry with no union at all. Unions in an industry usually also benefit employees without union since they need to compete with the better conditions created by unions
@@MisterFro9 I will say that I’m pro-union within my industry. I primarily just don’t want to speak for people working in industries that I’ve never been a part of. I assume that unions could probably provide a net good for any industry though.
@@tomlxyz I can say with quite a bit of certainty that I would prefer not to work in an industry with no unions. Which is probably a good indicator of my opinion on the efficacy of unions.
I work for my county, and I'm a union member. From my experiences, unions are a big benefit to the people. I work outside year-round, do some hard work and some not so hard work. The union negotiates our contract, and ensures that our wages don't stay stagnant, that we have good health/debtal insurance, and that there is a clear path up the ladder, as well as providing a way to grieve unfair treatment and providing a safer workplace than similar jobs. I also get a pension 9 years from now, which is more secure than a 401k. Compared to the other jobs I've had, I like this one the best, and that's because of this union.
I've been United Aerospace Workers (UAW), International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) Teamsters, AFL-CIO, and whatever union represents federal workers. I only saw the benefits of being in a collective bargaining union while in the government. With UAW and IAM, they had government contracts for aircraft, and were contractually obligated to pay a similar compensation package to what wage grade (WG) and general service (GS) government employees received. I was an auto mechanic later on, which is where the Teamsters and the AFL-CIO came in. Teamsters was General Tire, and I forget which outfit I worked for that was AFL-CIO. Interestingly (maybe), the IAMAW (which was just IAM at the time) was part of the AFL-CIO. Is part, I think. So yeah, no net benefit to any of them, and I couldn't tell you how beneficial being in a bargaining unit for the government actually was. I suspect that our wages and benefits were originally politically-motivated, rather than a result of any collective bargaining.
Here in Sweden most people are in unions. But our unions are different from most countries since strikes are rare and businesses are unionised too in employer organisations. The motivations between unions and employer organisations are typically very undramatic and unions will not ask for more than they know the businesses can afford to pay. For Americans it might sound crazy but many workplaces here wants the employees to join the union. Although we do have some companies that are anti union as well but the majority are not.
Yeah. It's a set up common in social market economies. Workers unions and a "capitalist" unions negotiate with the government as arbitrator. These unions are class unions because they extend to every sector instead of specialising in car manufacting jobs or healthcare jobs. The joke in Spain is that the patronal is the most Marxist because not only are the most class conscious but also have clear that they get their income from the plus value so they always try to suppress wages.
Same in germany. Another interesting phenomena is that some companies actually want to pay above the tarif that the worker organisations and the employee organisations have agreed on (I dont know how it excactly work but there is a spectrum of possible wages with the minimum amount being obviously the one most talked about) which is why they wont join or leave the employee organisation. A reason why this might happen is the current lack of available workers which is why some companies try to attract them through higher wages than average. As a consequence, you might be actually better off working for a company that is not part of these employee organisations but they provide a sort of standard wage niveau for the market which is quite important in my opinion.
@@Marvin-ii7bh At least here you can get more than the union minimum if you do better. However it is limited so the wage increase of the best worker is only a little bit better than the worst worker.
No cause the government could decide what the pay would be, and annually increase it like they do for government employees salary. As far as companies taking advantage and trying to not pay it's the same even with unions, they sue all the time except they have money and numbers to back up nd sue companies and the government, but unions they themselves are corrupt
In the simplest way to view this, there will always be far fewer employers than employees, and therefore employers will always have the upper hand in any negotiation (Oligopsony). Unions are a way, a way as flawed and imperfect as their members, to shift this balance in favor of the workers, if nothing else, simply by virtue of negating the "numerical advantage" of the employers
American workers numbers mean nothing as power to the employer way tipped in their “fewer” numbers. Inaccurate history and facts in videos and comments propagate this unfortunately
While 70s unions in the UK were perhaps overpowered, that following Thatcher the wages of the 95% have stagnated and declined while the wealth of capital increased by an order of magnitude just shows how necessary Unions were
Unions and regulations protect the working class, but that doesnt mean that those cant be used to screw over the working class by corrupt politicians and their rich donors, despite this some body or some thing has to keep corporations at bay.
In the 80s/90s, my mom used to be a bank teller when a Brazil was facing a hyperinflation; she and many others joined a union since the nationalized state bank had problems with infrastructure and their paychecks. All the members paid a monthly fee in exchange for some benefits (like discount at some business and even a workers club that they could enjoy at weekends), but things turned around when people found out that the leaderdship was defrauding the pension fund and the organization was facing serious debts. She had cut ties with them after she moved to another sector, but the organization had been disbanded in the 2000s; the worst part is that this type of thing wasn't rare, corruption still is a serious problem inside most of the labor unions in my country (like pretty much everything else), which explain why they still have a bad rep.
For me it's more along the lines of the people in charge. Regardless of union or not. I have experienced and seen positives and negatives with both. Yes with unions you have stability but that can also lead to stagnation and certain places being shutdown or on the losing end if they fall behind on technology, varying business tactics, etc. On the flip side with non unions, same thing. Although I would say between the two. With a non-union position you have possibilities for lowers lows as well as higher highs depending on where you work. So it's a matter of pick your poison in some cases. For most people a union job is probably best, if you like to be a bit more... agile or pick your own destiny so to speak. Union jobs are absolutely mind numbing. Just my .02
Places that can't survive while providing reasonable working conditions and pay shouldn't survive. We could have full employment if we put everyone in misery but what's the point of living such a life
While I can understand some of the criticisms of unions, I think things have reached a point where the power imbalance between the mega-rich/general owners of capital vs the average worker in the US has become so extreme that the only way for workers to have any kind of bargaining power is through collective action. I actually think there are a lot of comparisons between economic conditions today and what was going on during the gilded age in the late 1800's, which triggered a massive labor movement. The insane wealth inequality, government corruption, industrial/corporate consolidation, and a general shrinking of diversity within the economy itself are all parallels. In American history we tend to see big labor movements in response to broadly worsening economic conditions. The gilded age, the great depression, and the death of native manufacturing in the 70's were all things that triggered major labor movements. I think the great recession is one of the only major outliers in that it didn't. I think in the US, there's a general pattern that when the economy is doing well people see themselves as 'pre-rich' and don't have an incentive to have any kind of collective worker identity. However, when economic conditions get worse people have more of an incentive to see themselves within an 'us vs them' structure of the rich vs everyone else.
You missed the juciest part of labor history in the recent era, the Coal Wars of Appalacia from the 1890s to the 1920s. The climactic Battle of Blair Mountain was the first time bombs were dropped on American soil from airplanes, not Pearl Harbor like everyone thinks.
Bad video, talking about Marxism and Communism and flashing up images of Lenin during the beginning of the industrial revolution is just plain wrong. Russian revolution didn't happen until the next century. The OG's where the Tolpuddle Martyrs 1836 who marched on London and where duly executed. They, where the birth of Unionism. Guilds where NOT unions, fare from it, they where closed shops or monopolies there was no equality within their ranks.
9:28 Me: This is it! They’re gonna talk about Scranton/Wilkes-Barre! This is our story! Narrator: Nope. Just this minuscule event in Chicago that helped push along the timeline between the fall of the Maguires and the 1902 Roosevelt hearings. I come from arguably the third most important city in America and nobody talks about its history. When they do, it’s just “somewhere in Pennsylvania”.
Here in France, unions are still decently strong, but far from their prime, as they struggle to know who to defend with the very low amount of industry left in the country. Services jobs are sometimes unionized as well, sure, but they tend to be far less so than industry, probably in part because unions are seen as excuses for lazy workers to not do much while we intellectuals work ourselves to death for no reason. However, it's starting to change, because as is the case in most of the rich countries, the average Joe and even the average educated employee are starting to realize they won't ever be able to afford what was considered normal 50 years ago (homeownership being the biggest one)
I feel like 'the gig economy ' and the use of subcontracting is making people even poorer. I hope that soon there will be representatives for individuals that need to do lots of small jobs to survive.
So, imo not all unions are equal, and some are better than others. And as you mentioned, as they are democratic they don't always go how you think. That said there's certain industries that you definitely want to be in a union and you have holes in your head if you aren't.
"Scorpion bite" that's the most generic shit I've ever heard in my life....if you pull in work consistently for 1 year....you deserve compensation.... I understand America has a big military budget....just pull 2% of that away....and provide vacation and you will have good confident workers...
History repeating itself is sign of the degeneration of humanities current state of consciousness. This is due precisely to the twin destructive terrors of Nazism and Stalinism, as well as in general the massive devastation of two world wars. All things considered, its actually quite impressive history didn't end up regressing even more. But this does actually end up making the tasks of progress all the more simple and predictable, though for both the worker's movement and the modern reaction against it. To see and achieve our future, now, all one really needs to do is engage in a practical surveillance of the movements of the past..
Patrick Boyle, YT creator, offers an interesting take on how the value of the US dollar led to manufacturing flight, and by extention the decline of US unions.
You neglected to point out Reagan's part in breaking unions. Reagan used the military to break PATCO. In doing so he unleashed corporations to do the same. The unions built the middle class by demanding a fair share. Workers are worth more than they have been made to think. There power is in organizing and sticking together.
Well, i think unions are good. Thoug, I think the sponteneous, mass, ground up workers fomations which emerge in moments of intense struggle (workers councils) are so good they should form a state and sieze all power.
Organized labor (unions) are necessary to fight organized capital (corporations) because only the union has the leverage to represnt and protect the interests of workers in the face of the predations of the owner class who profits from their exploitation.
It's a bit sad to think that "It's my right to do what I want with my peasants (or even slaves)" and also "Let them eat cake" are alive and well. When people say we live in neofeudalism, they're basically talking about that except that politics and the economics are de facto joined together instead of being explicitly joined as it was 400 years ago. There's that and the lords of old were constantly at war with each other as the only way to get richer was to take over more land. Nowadays, horizontal competition doesn't make sense because everyone is invested into everyone else. Starting a new firm only works if the industry is completely new; if it's not, it'll get gobbled up. "But workers can quit" -- sure, but most don't simply because you'd be paid almost exactly the same -- think about quitting Wal-Mart to go work at Target. Skilled jobs are often so specialized that two firms that do the exact same thing on paper might need workers with completely different skillsets. Think of an enterprise backend software developer and a computer game developer -- both need programmers but if you try to switch, there are going to be a host of other candidates that can do exactly what they need versus you who will need to be trained and have a senior developer literally double-check everything you do. I'm not saying I have the answer to labor mismatches; I'm saying that "Just quit" isn't a pragmatic or even possible decision and that's not factoring in other human things like what your spouse does, if you have kids, where everyone needs to go to work/school, friend and family, if younger/older folks need assistance, commuting time, local amenities etc.
Damn right! we oughta get this stuff said and done and in the past by now, it’s crazy how we’ve gone back to pseudo-gilded-age like economical relations (or whatever it’s called)
4,000 years... It's about time unions we get rid of unions that brings financial burden to the employees as well as disrupting the market. For better communication, its easier in a non-union.
I’ve never been strictly for or against unions in all cases. But I will say that, within the industry that I currently work, I’ve worked for both a union and non-union shop, and my time in a union shop has been better paid, and I’ve felt greater job satisfaction.
Still not for unions after that experience?
To get the full experience you'd need to work for an industry with no union at all. Unions in an industry usually also benefit employees without union since they need to compete with the better conditions created by unions
@@MisterFro9 I will say that I’m pro-union within my industry. I primarily just don’t want to speak for people working in industries that I’ve never been a part of. I assume that unions could probably provide a net good for any industry though.
@@tomlxyz I can say with quite a bit of certainty that I would prefer not to work in an industry with no unions. Which is probably a good indicator of my opinion on the efficacy of unions.
@@MisterFro9 Just not ALWAYS for unions in all cases, like he said.
I work for my county, and I'm a union member. From my experiences, unions are a big benefit to the people. I work outside year-round, do some hard work and some not so hard work. The union negotiates our contract, and ensures that our wages don't stay stagnant, that we have good health/debtal insurance, and that there is a clear path up the ladder, as well as providing a way to grieve unfair treatment and providing a safer workplace than similar jobs. I also get a pension 9 years from now, which is more secure than a 401k. Compared to the other jobs I've had, I like this one the best, and that's because of this union.
I've been United Aerospace Workers (UAW), International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW) Teamsters, AFL-CIO, and whatever union represents federal workers. I only saw the benefits of being in a collective bargaining union while in the government.
With UAW and IAM, they had government contracts for aircraft, and were contractually obligated to pay a similar compensation package to what wage grade (WG) and general service (GS) government employees received.
I was an auto mechanic later on, which is where the Teamsters and the AFL-CIO came in. Teamsters was General Tire, and I forget which outfit I worked for that was AFL-CIO. Interestingly (maybe), the IAMAW (which was just IAM at the time) was part of the AFL-CIO. Is part, I think.
So yeah, no net benefit to any of them, and I couldn't tell you how beneficial being in a bargaining unit for the government actually was. I suspect that our wages and benefits were originally politically-motivated, rather than a result of any collective bargaining.
Here in Sweden most people are in unions. But our unions are different from most countries since strikes are rare and businesses are unionised too in employer organisations. The motivations between unions and employer organisations are typically very undramatic and unions will not ask for more than they know the businesses can afford to pay. For Americans it might sound crazy but many workplaces here wants the employees to join the union. Although we do have some companies that are anti union as well but the majority are not.
Yeah. It's a set up common in social market economies. Workers unions and a "capitalist" unions negotiate with the government as arbitrator.
These unions are class unions because they extend to every sector instead of specialising in car manufacting jobs or healthcare jobs.
The joke in Spain is that the patronal is the most Marxist because not only are the most class conscious but also have clear that they get their income from the plus value so they always try to suppress wages.
Same in germany. Another interesting phenomena is that some companies actually want to pay above the tarif that the worker organisations and the employee organisations have agreed on (I dont know how it excactly work but there is a spectrum of possible wages with the minimum amount being obviously the one most talked about) which is why they wont join or leave the employee organisation. A reason why this might happen is the current lack of available workers which is why some companies try to attract them through higher wages than average. As a consequence, you might be actually better off working for a company that is not part of these employee organisations but they provide a sort of standard wage niveau for the market which is quite important in my opinion.
@@Marvin-ii7bh At least here you can get more than the union minimum if you do better. However it is limited so the wage increase of the best worker is only a little bit better than the worst worker.
Yeah, its due to your system of sectoral bargaining and social democratic corporatism.
"The children yearn for the mines" 🤣
Child miners back then had that sigma grindset.
If it wasn't for unions, you would be earning a fraction of what you do today and the devide between rich and poor would be far greater.
Commie сoрe
No cause the government could decide what the pay would be, and annually increase it like they do for government employees salary. As far as companies taking advantage and trying to not pay it's the same even with unions, they sue all the time except they have money and numbers to back up nd sue companies and the government, but unions they themselves are corrupt
@@BuckyiScab
In the simplest way to view this, there will always be far fewer employers than employees, and therefore employers will always have the upper hand in any negotiation (Oligopsony). Unions are a way, a way as flawed and imperfect as their members, to shift this balance in favor of the workers, if nothing else, simply by virtue of negating the "numerical advantage" of the employers
If a simple mind needs a simple way to view this go on. Your simple explanation is too simple though and you know it. And it simply makes no sense
American workers numbers mean nothing as power to the employer way tipped in their “fewer” numbers. Inaccurate history and facts in videos and comments propagate this unfortunately
While 70s unions in the UK were perhaps overpowered, that following Thatcher the wages of the 95% have stagnated and declined while the wealth of capital increased by an order of magnitude just shows how necessary Unions were
Claim your 'here before a million views' ticket here
I hope so!
@@HowHistoryWorks you're going to build the channel out and hit it every time in the future!
Unions and regulations protect the working class, but that doesnt mean that those cant be used to screw over the working class by corrupt politicians and their rich donors, despite this some body or some thing has to keep corporations at bay.
always cool to open youtube to "uploaded X seconds ago" lol.
In the 80s/90s, my mom used to be a bank teller when a Brazil was facing a hyperinflation; she and many others joined a union since the nationalized state bank had problems with infrastructure and their paychecks. All the members paid a monthly fee in exchange for some benefits (like discount at some business and even a workers club that they could enjoy at weekends), but things turned around when people found out that the leaderdship was defrauding the pension fund and the organization was facing serious debts.
She had cut ties with them after she moved to another sector, but the organization had been disbanded in the 2000s; the worst part is that this type of thing wasn't rare, corruption still is a serious problem inside most of the labor unions in my country (like pretty much everything else), which explain why they still have a bad rep.
For me it's more along the lines of the people in charge. Regardless of union or not. I have experienced and seen positives and negatives with both. Yes with unions you have stability but that can also lead to stagnation and certain places being shutdown or on the losing end if they fall behind on technology, varying business tactics, etc.
On the flip side with non unions, same thing. Although I would say between the two. With a non-union position you have possibilities for lowers lows as well as higher highs depending on where you work.
So it's a matter of pick your poison in some cases. For most people a union job is probably best, if you like to be a bit more... agile or pick your own destiny so to speak. Union jobs are absolutely mind numbing.
Just my .02
Places that can't survive while providing reasonable working conditions and pay shouldn't survive. We could have full employment if we put everyone in misery but what's the point of living such a life
While I can understand some of the criticisms of unions, I think things have reached a point where the power imbalance between the mega-rich/general owners of capital vs the average worker in the US has become so extreme that the only way for workers to have any kind of bargaining power is through collective action.
I actually think there are a lot of comparisons between economic conditions today and what was going on during the gilded age in the late 1800's, which triggered a massive labor movement. The insane wealth inequality, government corruption, industrial/corporate consolidation, and a general shrinking of diversity within the economy itself are all parallels.
In American history we tend to see big labor movements in response to broadly worsening economic conditions. The gilded age, the great depression, and the death of native manufacturing in the 70's were all things that triggered major labor movements. I think the great recession is one of the only major outliers in that it didn't. I think in the US, there's a general pattern that when the economy is doing well people see themselves as 'pre-rich' and don't have an incentive to have any kind of collective worker identity. However, when economic conditions get worse people have more of an incentive to see themselves within an 'us vs them' structure of the rich vs everyone else.
slaves uhm stay put .
You missed the juciest part of labor history in the recent era, the Coal Wars of Appalacia from the 1890s to the 1920s. The climactic Battle of Blair Mountain was the first time bombs were dropped on American soil from airplanes, not Pearl Harbor like everyone thinks.
Bad video, talking about Marxism and Communism and flashing up images of Lenin during the beginning of the industrial revolution is just plain wrong. Russian revolution didn't happen until the next century. The OG's where the Tolpuddle Martyrs 1836 who marched on London and where duly executed. They, where the birth of Unionism. Guilds where NOT unions, fare from it, they where closed shops or monopolies there was no equality within their ranks.
9:28 Me: This is it! They’re gonna talk about Scranton/Wilkes-Barre! This is our story!
Narrator: Nope. Just this minuscule event in Chicago that helped push along the timeline between the fall of the Maguires and the 1902 Roosevelt hearings.
I come from arguably the third most important city in America and nobody talks about its history. When they do, it’s just “somewhere in Pennsylvania”.
Here in France, unions are still decently strong, but far from their prime, as they struggle to know who to defend with the very low amount of industry left in the country. Services jobs are sometimes unionized as well, sure, but they tend to be far less so than industry, probably in part because unions are seen as excuses for lazy workers to not do much while we intellectuals work ourselves to death for no reason. However, it's starting to change, because as is the case in most of the rich countries, the average Joe and even the average educated employee are starting to realize they won't ever be able to afford what was considered normal 50 years ago (homeownership being the biggest one)
I feel like 'the gig economy ' and the use of subcontracting is making people even poorer. I hope that soon there will be representatives for individuals that need to do lots of small jobs to survive.
So, imo not all unions are equal, and some are better than others. And as you mentioned, as they are democratic they don't always go how you think. That said there's certain industries that you definitely want to be in a union and you have holes in your head if you aren't.
You can even say the way plebeians of Rome refused to fight in wars unless they got political rights was a union of sorts
"Scorpion bite" that's the most generic shit I've ever heard in my life....if you pull in work consistently for 1 year....you deserve compensation.... I understand America has a big military budget....just pull 2% of that away....and provide vacation and you will have good confident workers...
History repeating itself is sign of the degeneration of humanities current state of consciousness. This is due precisely to the twin destructive terrors of Nazism and Stalinism, as well as in general the massive devastation of two world wars. All things considered, its actually quite impressive history didn't end up regressing even more. But this does actually end up making the tasks of progress all the more simple and predictable, though for both the worker's movement and the modern reaction against it. To see and achieve our future, now, all one really needs to do is engage in a practical surveillance of the movements of the past..
It's a little strange to cover the Luddites after talking about Marxism, lol. It should have been done the other way around.
3:08 You used a scene from the excellent HBO series, John Adams, to illustrate the 14th and 15th centuries?
Moses was the first union organizer 😅
Patrick Boyle, YT creator, offers an interesting take on how the value of the US dollar led to manufacturing flight, and by extention the decline of US unions.
Bro thank you for the knowledge.
Wanted a part time job so i got one at shoprite and these cheap mfs only pay 12 and the useless union would take 50 a week. I left quickly
You neglected to point out Reagan's part in breaking unions. Reagan used the military to break PATCO. In doing so he unleashed corporations to do the same. The unions built the middle class by demanding a fair share. Workers are worth more than they have been made to think. There power is in organizing and sticking together.
Also about naming knights of labor and the industrial workers of the world
IWW was one of the first who won the 8 hour workday
Not sure that dismissing the Solomonic origins of masonary is possible while still using the order to link to modern units but great vid still.
What about the KOL and IWW
Thank supply side Jesus we have “health benefits” today.
Well, i think unions are good. Thoug, I think the sponteneous, mass, ground up workers fomations which emerge in moments of intense struggle (workers councils) are so good they should form a state and sieze all power.
How did that end last time?
Organized labor (unions) are necessary to fight organized capital (corporations) because only the union has the leverage to represnt and protect the interests of workers in the face of the predations of the owner class who profits from their exploitation.
Nice
It's a bit sad to think that "It's my right to do what I want with my peasants (or even slaves)" and also "Let them eat cake" are alive and well.
When people say we live in neofeudalism, they're basically talking about that except that politics and the economics are de facto joined together instead of being explicitly joined as it was 400 years ago. There's that and the lords of old were constantly at war with each other as the only way to get richer was to take over more land. Nowadays, horizontal competition doesn't make sense because everyone is invested into everyone else. Starting a new firm only works if the industry is completely new; if it's not, it'll get gobbled up.
"But workers can quit" -- sure, but most don't simply because you'd be paid almost exactly the same -- think about quitting Wal-Mart to go work at Target. Skilled jobs are often so specialized that two firms that do the exact same thing on paper might need workers with completely different skillsets. Think of an enterprise backend software developer and a computer game developer -- both need programmers but if you try to switch, there are going to be a host of other candidates that can do exactly what they need versus you who will need to be trained and have a senior developer literally double-check everything you do.
I'm not saying I have the answer to labor mismatches; I'm saying that "Just quit" isn't a pragmatic or even possible decision and that's not factoring in other human things like what your spouse does, if you have kids, where everyone needs to go to work/school, friend and family, if younger/older folks need assistance, commuting time, local amenities etc.
"Just quit" is merely an excuse for companies not improving conditions, creating an illusion of choice when there is none
Damn right! we oughta get this stuff said and done and in the past by now, it’s crazy how we’ve gone back to pseudo-gilded-age like economical relations (or whatever it’s called)
Unions are a great idea. Relevant and effective in 2024? Not so much.
Children workers is best kind of employers
4,000 years... It's about time unions we get rid of unions that brings financial burden to the employees as well as disrupting the market. For better communication, its easier in a non-union.
Spambot rubbish!
Tf r u on💀
Bullshit.
Union Strong!