Donate
 to this campaign

If I believed unions were good for the working man, I'd be for them, but I firmly believe that they do more harm than good. Many union members have benefited, but it has been at the expense of other workers. (Some union workers have been hurt also, when their employers have gone out of business and left them jobless.) In Michigan, unions increase the cost of state government and public schools and they are primarily responsible for the loss of manufacturing jobs.

Collective bargaining is institutionalized extortion. This is how it works: Union representatives meet with Management and demand a certain pay rate. No science is used to come up with this rate; they pull it out of a hat. Management either agrees to the union's demands or risks getting forced into bankruptcy by a strike.

As a direct result of union workers being paid above the market rate, other workers are either unemployed or paid less than they would be otherwise. This is because unionized companies have to raise prices to pay for the higher wages, and when product prices go up, demand goes down and production has to be curtailed, resulting in layoffs. The customers who do pay the higher price have less money for other purchases, so demand for the products of other businesses goes down also, forcing them to either reduce their prices – which might require paying their employees less - or to cut production, resulting in more layoffs.

Fear of unions often has the same effect as unionization. At a non-union Toyota plant in Kentucky, assembly workers are paid twice the average manufacturing wage in the area. (NPR, 12/27/07)

In a free labor market, anyone who wants to work can do so. He simply underbids the competition. With everyone working, more goods and services are produced and there is more for everyone. The average wage may seem higher with collective bargaining, but that's because the (zero) wages of the unemployed are not included in the calculation. Also, the higher union wages are offset by higher prices - a higher cost of living. 

One-on-one wage “bidding” won’t really occur in a free labor market. Employers won’t negotiate with individual employees. All employees doing the same kind of work will get the same pay. But if an employer has 50 employees he is paying $20 a hour and he is getting applications from qualified workers who will work for $15 and hour, he can try lowering the rate. He just has to be careful that he doesn’t go so low that he loses his best employees. And when he finds that he can’t keep fully staffed with qualified workers, he’ll be forced to raise their pay to retain the ones he has and to attract others. 

The right to unionize is protected by federal law, so there isn't much we can do here in Michigan other than try to persuade employees to vote the union out. But we can weaken unions financially by making Michigan a "right to work" state rather than "union shop". A right-to-work law prohibits unions from making membership or payment of dues or "fees" a condition of employment. This means that even if the majority of employees have chosen to be represented by a union, the rest of them don't have to join and don't have to pay union dues. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy has proposed a right-to-work amendment to the Michigan Constitution.

I fully expect that driving out the unions will restore prosperity to Michigan. Lower labor costs will allow businesses to reduce prices and sell more goods, requiring them to hire more workers. The prospect of not having to deal with unions will attract new businesses. Soon, the unemployment rate will drop to zero. Welfare caseloads and crime will decrease. With the increase in production and statewide income, tax revenues will increase, enabling the state to fix its roads, staff its police force and educate its citizens. With a better educated workforce, wages will increase for the proper reason: not because of union extortion, but because the workers are more productive.

Unions in state government
Unions in public schools
Union facts
More thoughts on unions
What economists think
What union sympathizers say