We could cite instances of abuse both union and non-union for days. (The guy in my office who slept 2 hours a day in his cube every single day comes to mind.) The fact is, belonging to a union doesn’t make you anymore likely to abuse a system. The fact that unions have a guaranteed base salary is proof of their effectiveness. I’m sure you’d be upset if someone doing the same job you do got paid 20% more for no reason. Structured salaries help mitigate that from happening. I’m not saying they prevent it, but it does make it harder to institute unbalanced salary scales.

If this is just about someone making more than you, however, then we’re not having the same discussion. Workers unions exist to benefit the members. If they have higher pay, that is evidence that the union is working.

That isn’t to say unions are without issues, as I mentioned at the beginning of this post. Supporting the right of workers to unionize is different than blindly supporting everything they want or try to do. But reforming unions is different than whole-sale wiping them out, and that’s where I have a problem.

http://progressillinois.com/2008/11/25/kirk-repeats-gm-claim

http://www.ehow.com/facts_6878244_average-gm-union-salary.html

The big lie is that they’re miles above everyone else. They’re not; they’re the ones bringing change to the non-unions. You can not like the people in the union, but you have to divorce yourself from the emotion of the icky, jackass-ery of a meeting and see the big picture.

As someone who got kicked to the curb when the company needed to shore up the bottom line, you should be more open to protecting workers’ rights. Just sayin’.