KHH1

Obama can't save organized labor

By Washington Examiner | January 26, 2015 | 5:00 am

Unions are losing ground especially rapidly in traditional labor strongholds. (iStock)
The Department of Labor released its annual tally of union membership on Friday. To no one's surprise, it is down once again. Only 11.1 percent of all workers, and only 6.6 percent of private sector workers, belonged to labor unions in 2014, down from 11.3 and 6.7 percent, respectively a year earlier.

It has been a long slide — the overall number is down from 20.1 percent unionized in 1983, the first year for which there are directly comparable statistics. But there are numbers from before that time, and as Heritage labor economist James Sherk points out, they show last year's level of union membership to be the lowest in the U.S. since 1912.

Local and federal government employees were among the only groups where unions grew last year. Among state government employees, the number of union members declined by 99,000 from their 2013 levels. It is clear why unions fought so hard in 2012 and 2014 to defeat Wisconsin's Republican Gov. Scott Walker, whose 2011 union reforms have prompted tens of thousands of public employees in his state to resign their membership.


With fewer workers than ever interested in unionization, it is also easy to see why unions have resorted to stealing from the less fortunate. They have desperately attempted to use their connections in Democratic-run state governments to force daycare and health care workers to pay dues against their will, just because the children they watch or the disabled family members they care for receive government benefits. Thanks to vigorous legal challenges by the unions' victims, courts have not looked kindly upon such schemes.

Unions are losing ground especially rapidly in traditional labor strongholds. Among the biggest state losers of union members was Michigan, where the rolls declined by 48,000 during the first full year after the state's right-to-work law took effect. The biggest loser was Washington State (at 55,000), where after years of union int***sigence and hostility, Boeing has finally begun moving thousands of jobs away to right-to-work Oklahoma and South Carolina.

But the most dispiriting number for the union bosses in recent years has to be the distribution of union membership by age. For today's younger workers, unions aren't even a consideration. The average union member is substantially older than the average American worker. The over-65 crowd is the only age cohort to see a modest numerical increase in union membership since Obama took office in 2009 — among all other workers, membership is down by 907,000 over that period. Under age 25, unionization is almost non-existent today at 4.5 percent for all workers, public and private included.

President Obama, who has pulled so many strings to save organized labor from irrelevance — even violating the Constitution to make illegal appointments to the National Labor Relations Board — hasn't given up just yet. He indicated as much in his State of the Union Address last week. “We still need laws that strengthen rather than weaken unions, and give American workers a voice,” he said.

But increasingly, the voice of Big Labor's leaders is a shrill, self-serving political voice that American workers do not agree with or want representing them. It is also a voice which, as it becomes progressively weaker, will be ever more dependent on Democratic politicians' generosity for its survival than it has been in the past.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

The simple t***h is the more expensive labor becomes the more vulnerable those with lesser marketable sk**ls become. Take the first rungs off the ladder and those are the folks who never get started. Meanwhile, we make matters worse by importing more and more folks in this category while doing those things that make it more difficult to profitably employ them.

jimahrens Loc: California

Big labor is like entrenched politicians. Claim to help the people when all the while there vampires sucking life out of them.

KHH1

I see why I did not do groupthink professionally, thinking there is safety in numbers. Destroy unions and find out what corporations never really wanted to pay in terms of salaries and benefits. The modern corporation is only interested in executive compensation and shareholder/investor returns, nothing to benefit the worker. That is whay they automate and/or outsource every chance they get.

jimahrens Loc: California

That may be in some but most corps treat workers well unions out lived usefulness long ago.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

I'm not sure why you think the modern corporation is any different than corporations have largely been in the past. I've be working in industry for over 50 years now and don't see any more or less drive for results now than then. The difference now is they have both more competition and opportunity globally now than before.

KHH1

Yeah...they treat the highly sk**led who are not easy to replace okay..but those that have basic sk**ls are at the mercy of the organization and are the targets of automation and outsourcing efforts.

KHH1

Look at the ratio of worker pay to executive compensation. One barley keeps up with inflation and the other has risen exponentially

jimahrens Loc: California

Then people need to up there sk**ls. You dont seem to understand most people happy just where there at. It the blabbing liberals that want it but don't want to pay the price

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

Not sure what you think that indicates, but check the ratio of the average worker and that of the professional athlete - or actor - or TV personality - or Singer - or.....

Executive pay is largely driven by the same forces that drive celebrities - market forces. Ultimately it also drives the wages of workers - long term. If an employer cannot sell the workers' output for more than the cost of it, he will not hire folks. That is the true and harsh reality of a market economy.

The market value of those with limited sk**ls has always been weak, but as we've remarkably increased the supply (by failed public education systems and the importation of more, there is a glut of supply. Meanwhile the cost of employing a person increases, causing a decrease in the demand. The problem we see is largely the result of these realities - and unless one wants to abandon the free market system, these harsh results will continue.

jimahrens Loc: California

Well said my friend.

KHH1

*Okay...have it your way...i'm just fine*

Trooper745 Loc: Carolina

The biggest things unions have ever done was destroy jobs and drive jobs overseas. The modern unions are only interested in ever increasing union officer compensation and power gained by political contributions to corrupt politicians, who in many cases disagree with the political position of the worker, ..... absolutely nothing to benefit the worker.

KHH1

Wow..i know of private industry and gov't unions that have done great for their workers...but put yourselves at the mercy of the "court" with no protections or collective bargaining entities working on your behalf..many think this will get people of color excluded and allow the "good ole boys " club to flourish...but it will not happen like that...everyone will get marginalized the same. If I was a selfish person, I would just say you all get what you have coming..kinda like when W was elected...everything went to s**t..the stock market, housing markets and the economy.....I do not think the right cares, as long as they are the ones in power.

jimahrens Loc: California

Get a grip you have absolutely no idea what damage unions have done.