Europe's Secret to Saving American Labor Unions

Make American Labor Great Again? Labor Unions in Europe form the backbone of a resilient and well trained workforce, but in America they have been declining for decades. What gives? Come with me as we world of labor unions, highlighting the critical differences between European and American systems.
If you're curious about how labor movements operate across the Atlantic or seeking strategies that could bolster the US labor movement, this video is a must-watch!
📝 Video Timestamps:
00:00 - Introduction to Labor Unions in Europe vs. the US
03:47 - How the US organizes Unions - and how Europe does it Differently
08:31 - Could Sectoral bargaining work in the USA?
11:49 - Scandinavia High Union Rates
14:33 - Labor Unions Saved the German Economy
🔵 What You'll Learn:
The fundamental structural differences in labor unionization between Europe and the United States.
Historical and cultural factors that have shaped the labor movement on both continents.
How union density and collective bargaining coverage differ significantly.
The impact of legal frameworks and governmental support on the effectiveness of labor unions.
Innovative strategies employed by European unions that could serve as a blueprint for invigorating the US labor movement.
🔵 Key Differences Explored:
Union Density: We'll compare the percentage of workers represented by unions in Europe versus the US.
Collective Bargaining: Learn how European unions manage to cover a larger swath of the workforce through collective agreements.
Legal Protections: Discover the laws that empower or hinder union activities in different countries.
Sectoral Bargaining: Understand this powerful tool used in Europe that could potentially transform the American labor landscape.
🔵 Strategies for the US:
The European approach to social dialogue and its potential in the US context.
How sectoral bargaining can lead to more equitable workplaces in the US.
The role of works councils and the possibility of their integration into the US labor system.
📈 Are you a labor enthusiast, a history buff, or someone invested in the future of workers' rights? Join our community for discussions, updates, and insights into labor relations worldwide. Share your thoughts in the comments, and let's build a knowledge base that can help improve labor conditions globally.
Episode No. 128
📷 Follow me on Instagram: / typeashton
🤳🏻 TikTok: / typeashton
🖥 Website: www.blackforestfamily.com
📧 E-mail: [e-mail]
𝗦𝗨𝗣𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧 𝗠𝗘
👑 Patreon: / typeashton
#LaborUnions #EuropeVsUS #WorkersRights #CollectiveBargaining #UnionDensity #SectoralBargaining #LaborMovement #SocialDialogue #WorkCouncils #TradeUnions #LaborRights #LaborLaw #SEOOptimized #Educational

[@LiiMuRi]

I come from Finland where sectrorial bargaining is common, and have always wondered why that's not the case in the US. Trying to bargain in single enterprise level seems so inefficient and difficult

[@WladylawGomulka]

its because capitalists convinced massses that labour unions are communist and that its in the best of everyone to let capitalists do what they want

[@johnhendriks4085]

Same here in the Netherlands

[@EyMannMachHin]

I think that is more down to the fact that implementing a sectorial bargaining system across all US states is more like implementing a unified sectorial bargaining system across all EU countries, rather than just one country at a time.

[@FalkonNightsdale]

I think, that to a degree it's caused by the way USA came to existence - as an improvised system built far away from any sort of functional administrative… That said, this funneled to extreme individualism and cutthroat mentality. Meanwhile in Europe, we vere starting at harsh conditions, where cooperation was survival necessity and eventually carried that mentality even to more advanced society, where it manifested through creation of guilds, which in some form frequently exist even today and thtough negotiations of these neo-guilds, sector-wide contracts are negotiated…

[@teaser6089]

That's cause American companies don't want workers to fight for their rights. That's why Amazon tries to pit workers against eachother is a nazi-esque work culture where you are rewarded when you report it when you think other workers are trying to form a union. The Ferengi of Star Trek really are a good analogue to modern day America

[@darkredvan]

I am from Germany. I worked in a company with roughly 50 + - employees, about 2/3 of them working in the actual workshop. About 40 + are members of a Union. Though there were actual strikes in our area in the last 10 years, our company was too small to be affected. Our Union definitely achieved a lot, but - as you mentioned in your video - it was not always about higher wages or less working hours. To the contrary the main focus was to keep companies healthy, able to keep their employees even in harsh times. It worked, I was fortunate enough to keep my job. And yes, if you work in a good company, why move? I worked for the same company for nearly 35 years, until I retired. BTW I had a colleague who worked at this company for over 50 years. He joined at 14 and retired at 66. Impressive, isn‘t it?

[@quantuman100]

You see wealthy people are wealthy because they are better and smarter than you are, you should be quiet and follow them. seems a bit crazy yes?

[@KaiHenningsen]

@@quantuman100No, just seems monumentally stupid. Most wealthy people are wealthy because they inherited their wealth.

[@TotallMax13]

@@KaiHenningsen Or used unethical practices to either collect up most of the profits or just straight up scam people. Are they smarter? Sure. Are they better (people)? Most of the time, no.

[@quantuman100]

@@KaiHenningsen yet it's an incredibly common stance for people to have, after all if you believe we live in a meritocracy, then the rich people must somehow be inherently better BECAUSE they are wealthy

[@RustyDust101]

@@quantuman100 Meaning, they succeed more at exploiting others, often in a backhanded way that doesn't cause too much concern among the public. Only the rarest versions of truly ultra-wealthy ever did so with a humanitarian approach. Well-off, yes, there may be quite a few; but truly ultrarich, nope. Those are the extreme exceptions.

[@Sythemn]

My primary customer was German for firmware. Got sent there for work a couple times. Their office was productive and happy. Most of the guys there had been there for decades and knew as much or more than I did about the general code despite each having their specialty areas. I have nothing but good things to say about the experience of working with them. So clearly whatever Germany is doing works well for an actual productive and quality life.

[@ReginLyngs]

I am glad to be in an society where the "American dream" is possible because of my ancestors and thier choices to make the welfare system we have here in Denmark, where it's not everyone for themselves but often we are in it together

[@SmilingShadow-jl5tr]

Your ancestors made choices, and then your current politicians made choices, that set you on a trajectory to become a caliphate. Also, don’t buy into all the BS you see in the media. I moved from Poland to USA. My buddy, with whom I did Master’s thesis went to Germany. He became quite an important figure in the German government science establishment, I am just an average consultant. I am way, WAY wealthier than he is. There are people working fast food jobs in the USA who have bigger houses than German professors. Granted, we are talking Republican states, where this is possible, not the Democrat-run failed economies, but as I said: It is happening. The media will simply never tell you about it.

[@dutchman7623]

@@SmilingShadow-jl5tr Wealth isn't money, it's quality of life and satisfaction. Free from worries, even when things go bad, there is a common network for all.

[@FalkonNightsdale]

​@@SmilingShadow-jl5trExcept, he don't have to be scared to call an ambulance, when he's injured and his house is probably properly built and is situated close to all amenities - not a paperhouse parody, that is usually constructed in USA in urban sprawls far from anything…

[@natanoj16]

​@@SmilingShadow-jl5trwhat the heck do you mean? Only 4.1% of danish people are muslim

[@Nemrai]

@@SmilingShadow-jl5tr It's just sad to see opinions like yours. No, Denmark is in no way about to 'become a caliphate'.

[@electricgecko8997]

I’m a member of one of the larger public sector unions in Canada. Thanks to the union, my pay is good, my benefits are good and my job security is firm. But what I see online is nothing but hate and vitriol towards unions. What I never understand is how people will see someone else in a union and think, “I want to tear them down,” instead of thinking, “I need to get me some of that.”

[@kevinstfort]

Exactly

[@jattikuukunen]

It may be informational warfare, especially if it was someone you don't know.

[@TankEnMate]

I suspect it's more to do with indoctrination (probably from socially conservative media that is also pro-business owner) rather than people examining the evidence.

[@Boris80b]

Corporate propaganda isn't as powerful in Canada as in the US

[@jensholm5759]

I agree. Too few much take all the money and wellfare. Thats legalisted theft and not producing best to the price

[@tommyholmbom6151]

One important thing about collective agreements is that there is some benefits for the company too, for example it contains rules and regulations that is the same for all the companies that it caters to and that makes for a more even competition and a certain level of stability... I am from Sweden and we have a collective agreement at our company...

[@kronop8884]

Very true, its one of the reason many companies actively seek to sign a collective agreement with the union at least in the Nordic countries. In Sweden collective agreements cover around 90% of the workforce.

[@lenasoderberg2583]

Yupp Tesla is getting a taste of it at the moment

[@NormanF62]

American employer-labour relations revolve around a zero sum model. Someone has to win and someone has to lose and the pie that both sides can divide up is limited and no one has an incentive to distribute gains evenly or to think with a view towards the future. No one really is a stakeholder in the broader running of the economy or how conflicts are resolved. The European concept is the opposite: win-win. Everyone wins and the pie is never fixed and there are incentives to spread benefits around and to work together for the future. Employers and workers are stakeholders and both understand the importance of economic vitality and stability and seek to mimimise conflict. You could think of this difference as an adversarial vs a cooperative arrangement rooted in philosophical views of the profit-driven market and the social market. Between the US and Europe they’re stark.

[@urlauburlaub2222]

That's nonsense for the US and nonsense for Europe.

[@NormanF62]

@@urlauburlaub2222 Keep in mind the individualism inherent in American culture has inhibited social identity to an extent not present in Europe and that’s also been a contributing factor.

[@joseph1150]

@@NormanF62 You speak like individualism is bad. The funny thing is the zero sum attitude that Unions have is a direct result of their communist background as Marxist economics is about zero sum conflict between labor and the money men. It might be better if a more corporatist model was applicable to the US, though the Scandinavian model would never work in the US. Multiculturalism and individual rights trump what is good for the over all state after all.

[@Boris80b]

Ah... When conservatives start making excuses for greed

[@dereckhasken9055]

@@joseph1150 unions have a communist background??? don’t embarrass yourself by saying foolish things!

[@ArthurOfThePond]

Denmark doesn't even have a minimum wage, because it's seen to undermine the strength of the unions, by letting companies off easy instead of negotiating.

[@tomdonahoe3539]

When German company Volkswagen built a plant in Tennessee, they gave a presentation to state government officials summarizing how their manufacturing plants were organized. In that, the mentioned that their corporate policy was to reserve 2 to 3 seats on their local board of directors for labor representatives. Well, the governor & state legislators went ballistic *vehemently* opposing this policy almost to the point of canceling the whole deal. I'll give you one guess which political party they were from, and the 1st guess doesn't count. The deal happened, but I don't remember how the board labor representative issue was resolved.

[@peter_meyer]

From Wikipedia: "Volkswagen announced a new policy allowing groups representing at least 15% of the workforce to participate in meetings, with higher access tiers for groups representing 30% and 45% of employees. This prompted anti-UAW workers who opposed the first vote to form a rival union, the American Council of Employees. In December, 2014, the UAW was certified as representing more than 45% of employees"

[@bwest-yq3uc]

Yes, the Republican governor, US senator, all local and state officials told them No, cant do that and they could not even elected an union for employees. VW held a scam of an union election knowing the union would lose. Cards were stacked against them winning. That is the attitudes and the power that kills unions in the USA. Chamber of Commerce and the Republican party will fight any elections for unions. Hopeful the new UAW will try to organize VW again.

[@ane-louisestampe7939]

A few years back I read that 500 Danish workers left the factory one Friday morning, because they were fed up with the way the boss SPOKE to them. By Monday morning, the boss had undergone a total personality change, and they could return to work. Unions CAN make miracles 🤣

[@andrayellowpenguin]

Hah! This reminds me of when i told my family in Canada about strikes here in France ! They were like "OMG fu*ing unions!" 😮 I was shocked, since here most people are for the strikers! It's so ridiculous how on the american continent the companies managed to turn workers against unions?! It makes no logical sense! How will your rights be respected or enforced or negotiated?! Especially since in the US you don't even accept government interference?! I mean, you just expect companies to insure themselves that they treat people ok and don't just go for more profit?!? Yeah, right, and there are pink elephants flying in the sky! 🤦 It's like being against taxes for the super rich because "if i ever get super rich I won't like it"! So... You'd rather there was less money for you NOW, basically ensuring you never get any benefits like unemployment or state ensured health care (because it's sooo expensive, obviously, according ti America), just in case someday you'll get so rich you can't possibly spend that money in your life time and THEN you won't like being taxed on that excedent?! Seriously?!? Did you even look at the statistics for becoming super rich if you don't come from a seriously rich and connected family?! The odds for 99% of people are null! Get real!

[@urlauburlaub2222]

The US was for government interference, that's why you have so much shitty unions there. Inflation and bankrupt middle sized companies. They all do well, if they work without any governmental interference, so they all make profits and treat people OK. This was basically the way until Obummacare, which then reduced the income after costs dramatically.

[@jattikuukunen]

They're trying to turn workers against unions here in Finland also. The public discourse has been weird for a few years.

[@devandestudios128]

Americans workers don't have any rights. There is barely a federal min wage. Individual states can set their own min wage, but it isn't seen as a right. It is almost always the company and it's shareholders that labor laws favor in the U.S. Unions have been demonised here because they fight for the workers, not the companies. And the CEOs of those companies clearly don't want to be forced to take any amount of pay cut, they wouldn't be able to live as lavish a lifestyle as they like. They don't give a damn about their employees. Even though, without the employees, there would be no company.

[@ToothbrushMan]

I think there's an extraordinarily destructive situation in both the USA and in the UK where a culture of management vs Union, a "them-against-us", culture has been actively pursued by both management and unions - mainly by Conservative ideology that claims that "giving in" to the Unions is akin to surrender to Marxism or some such nonsense. There is thus a huge amount of distrust between the two sides and they simply refuse to cooperate even in the day to day running of the business. In Europe, Unions are actually PART of the business and are deeply involved in its fortunes. To the point where if the business is doing badly, sales are falling and they need to cut staff, the Unions are completely understanding of this and will actually help select those who will have to lose their jobs - cooperation that is unheard of in the USA and UK.

[@gleggett3817]

If the management don't approach the unions before coming up with their redundancy plans, then the unions can't help the company before situation has gotten to that point and end up in the position of supporting workers by making sure the employer handles redundancy fairly and according to the rules.

[@ToothbrushMan]

@@gleggett3817 Indeed,. And in the USA and UK they just don't even do approach the Unions. Whereas in Europe the unions have been part of the business from when the business was started.

[@Boris80b]

Correct

[@charlesunderwood6334]

The UK was starting to move towards the mainland European model of large scale negotiation of work conditions, but clearly there were a small number of people very unhappy with that, hence the disinformation campaign that led to Brexit.

[@reneolthof6811]

My overriding question after watching your TYPE ASHTON video’s more and more is: why is it that American systems in general seems so much less sensible than European? Week after week the US of A leaves the impression that their structures and regulations are inferior. The answer to this question seems to lie in the higher value given to money in the US compared to Europe where other values such as work-life balance are held in higher esteem.Short term vs long term, profit vs well-being.

[@LarsPW]

American rich people and employers managed to nurture the notion that governmental action is bad and would limit the freedom for all. And in general the US think that European economical ideas are too small for themselves, they criticize the absence of people like Steve Jobs or Elon Musk.

[@Mayagick]

Good questions. Part of the problem are customer expectaitions like same day delivery as in Amzn pr1me, hard jobs but not well rewarded. Ashton discovers more and more unvisible sightseeings of Europe.

[@wora1111]

I am wondering about the same question and I see one main reason in the way the public opinion is shaped and another in the way the government is build. The media shaping the public opinion are mostly private instead of public. That makes it easy to influence information and the opinion of the population. The voting system was designed at a time without phones and internet and relied on horses to transport information. So government was less able to influence the everyday life of the people as well (Nobody would mind you crossing state lines). And these days smart (or ruthless) people are using the archaic rules to their personal advantages. Many European countries have been updating their constitution in the last century, sometimes because being forced by the USA ....

[@DankoDable]

Don't forget the dollar. The USA is still holding the benefit of printing its own money. They pumping billions of dollars into the market to stabilize it. The national debt is growing significantly because of this (2001: 5.6 trillion and 2023: 33.2 trillion US$).

[@quantuman100]

@@LarsPW so, while this sentiment was always around, somehow it didn't really reach its stride until some pseudo economic hack published her line of train smut such as "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead"

[@almerindaromeira8352]

In Germany there are collective bargaining agreements (Tarifverträge) which cover most professions and there are laws stating that above a certain number of employees (500) the company has to give the employees representation at the board level (Aufsichtsrat). Unions like ver.di, IG Metall or EVG do much for the average worker but I personally wouldn't say they are the backbone of our wealthy/ healthy industry.

[@urlauburlaub2222]

The bargaining agreements done by Unions are just shit, because the Unions are most likely hijacked with Socialists and worker councils, so they effectively manage to surpress competition among workers and individual salaries. The result is, that they and the companies cry for the state to help them out. It's basically the worst system and a complete rejection of the former "Soziale Marktwirtschaft" of Ludwig Erhard. So, the economy is not central, but connections over universities etc...this whole Green shit is based around it, not work and performance.

[@oddbird5825]

One famous Union that America had that no body ever talks about anymore was the IWW or Wobblies as some would call them. They practiced something called Union Solidarity. The idea was that instead of having a Union for every trade and company, it was a one size fits all. So when Lumberjack’s would strike and need something, they would get help and support from railroad workers, textile workers, etc. It was like kind of permanent activist branch for Unions and I wish it still existed. :(

[@cynic7049]

IWW was mentioned a fair bit in School and media here in Swede at least when I was young. But only in the context of Joe Hill (born Joel Hägglund in Gävle, Sweden), who is still considered a hero and martyr by many Swedish unions [We do have a thing for music here].

[@frankmitchell3594]

This was specifically outlawed in the UK under Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government. I believe the term used was a ban on 'secondary action'.

[@oddbird5825]

Interesting! You just taught me a new thing! Thank you. :)@@cynic7049

[@bwest-yq3uc]

Taft Hardy Act outlawed that practice and unions have limited organizing ability in America.

[@smftrsddvjiou6443]

One of the main reasons in the late 19. century, that companies in Germany accepted sectorial wages, was to avoid competitions of wages between these companies. So , companies regarded that as beneficial.

[@SharienGaming]

technically the US companies did the same thing... they just cut the workers out of that negotiation and cooperate with each other to minimize worker pay... and then they also did the same for customers too cartels are "fun"...

[@emmabraem1729]

The Ghent System also provides loyers in case something goes so bad you have to go to court against your employer. Living in Belgium prrovides a lot of security. In spite of the problems our little country has, I love living here in Ghent.

[@Carewolf]

It also has the funny situation that the unemployment funds are gathered in foundations that are incentivized to invest in business that creates jobs in their segment. Making unions a great source of risk willing capital during recessions

[@katie.r.vannuys]

Great insights as usual! I’m cheering on the expansion of Unions here in the USA.

[@kiddracoify]

Not to mention that even if unions are sectorial, other sectors can fall in because of sympathy until a total shut down. I mean I am a union member and I was ready to fall in with the strikes on public transtport this year... just because their strikes made my life so much more complicated XD so.. mission accomplished XD Great video as always

[@NickfromNLondon]

I love your posts which are informative and thought provoking. However “beg the question” does not mean pose the question but to ask a question which proposes the answer.

[@_SpamMe]

One thing I suspect many don't know is how violently unions were suppressed in the US at times. They were incidents where people brought in machine guns to end strikes, with frequently dozens dead. Ultimately the unions were broken via politics, but just plain violence also contributed (not saying that unions also weren't violent at times...).

[@EmpReb]

Yeah like commies levels violent. A lot unions were and still are front for them. Labor made a bad bed.

[@marie-andreec5164]

I'm in Quebec, we have a mix of sectoral and company-specific unions. Teachers and health services employees are holding a general strike day tomorrow. They belong to different unions working together because the government - their employer - negociates with them as a group. I belong to a company-specific union and often hear from management that my large company (about 7000 employees across Canada) would be impossible to manage without unions. Unions push for better pay, sure, but mainly for better managers and happier employees. Happy employees are better employees and they'll tend to remain with the company longer, reducing recruitment and retention costs and keeping expertise within the company. You could even say that active unions lead to better, more competitive companies, because there's nothing that costs more to a company than shitty bosses and employees who hate them.

[@samfetter2968]

I'd say you pretty much nailed it there. Thanks for another well done vid🥰

[@TypeAshton]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you.

[@michael-gk3ib]

I live in Denmark and I have retired early due to illness. But because of union, I still get paid $2800 before taxes every month until I'm 67 years old, I'm now 47 years old. At the same time, I was paid $30,000, which I did not have to pay taxes on. At the same time, if I can work 8 hours a week without being deducted from my pension, I must. And in Denmark, my treatment is in hospital, which costs over 50,000 dollars A year for free, spends little money on medicine. So even if I am retired, I am still a member of a trade union for a small payment for solidarity work, I have been a member since I was 18 years old and have and will always believe in union😊

[@Boris80b]

And that's the way it should be done in the entire civilized world

[@jensschroder8214]

Germany has reduced labor costs, which is also reflected in the fact that domestic demand has fallen. Wage costs were undercut primarily by temporary work. Companies often no longer hire themselves but instead commission temporary employment agencies to hire workers. These workers then fall outside the scope of traditional unions. That's why their wages are lower. Instead of employing workers permanently and ensuring their employment as before, the temporary workers are fired after the order has been completed. This means that workers who get sick or are simply older can be quickly eliminated. The costs for this are then borne by the unemployment insurance or the social systems. But on the other hand, the labor shortage leads to strange conditions again. Many permanent nurses quit and go into temporary employment. They earn more there and can choose their working conditions. The permanent nurses then have to work weekend shifts and public holidays, while the temporary nurses then have to take time off.

[@bwest-yq3uc]

America is the "Sweat Shop" of the Industrial Nations. Employees get minimum wages, no benefits and kicked to the curb is they get sick or too old to work. This is the Land of BIG CEO salaries and bonuses and golden parachutes. The UAW is an outlier in the working world of the average American. They do not have a union or will ever see those benefits in their working lives.

[@awijntje14]

Another excellent video Ashton! I think you summed it up perfectly at around @20:00 "short term profits over long term". In my mind the fact that in most EU countries workers have a mich stronger position in the market (healthcare not tied to employer, small/non-existent college debt etc) makes employers need to compete on good working conditions and benefits...(and strong workers come from a strong education system).

[@stephenmcnamara8318]

When exactly will that show in any sort of results? German companies, german stocks, and generally all of the German economy has been pretty stagnant for 20 years - with returns on investment, margins, and wage growth all lagging the USA significantly. There is no long term where this looks sensible....except if you consider the moments of friction in a very outsized manner (unemployment, moving jobs). The economic research on company specific education vs people specific education is also very lopsided - with the individual deriving very little long term benefit from company specific education. It is not showing up in wage growth (often very limited within a single company) - which does far better when moving from one company to a different company. Also individual skill growth (education) sticks with that person when they change jobs.

[@awijntje14]

@@stephenmcnamara8318am quite curious as to what you mean with a "result"? Personally I think growth or increased profits and margins serve only a minority "stakeholder" in a company. Would it be so wrong for a company to "break even" each year and thus be able to give its employees a 4 day work week or better healthcare, pension etc?

[@stephenmcnamara8318]

@@awijntje14 It is late (I do live in Germany) - but here some short form answers. I went over to the OECD stats page to compare avg annual wages of Germany vs the USA from 2000-2021 They conveniently have them in 3 measures, nominal, constant currency and constant currency at Purchasing Power Parity. I just eyeballed them, and took the one with the highest values, which was the 3rd (maybe I will do all 3 or an avg tomorrow) - over that 20yr period Germany has seen an avg wage growth of 17% total...while the US comes in at 26% - which is 50% higher avg wage growth. That does seem a pretty decent first measure. I should possibly mention that one of my graduate degrees is from University of Chicago with a lot of interaction with the Economics department - so I am not writing as a completely illiterate person in terms of micro and macro-economics. Now to the company that decides to forego pursuing profit for a "break even" strategy - and then using the foregone profits for the benefit of it's workforce. This is unlikely to be something which can be done at scale - and different industries have VERY different % of costs derived from wages and benefits. A high headcount manufacturing company in a tight margin industry (pretty much what Germany is famous for - cars, machines, parts, etc) will often have wage costs in the 20-50% of expenditures - and capital investment (think factories) at quite a high level. This would not be the case in an industry like Software (where Germany lags) - where Meta has 66k employees with revenue of close to 2m/employee and profits of over 400k/employee compared to Mercedes with 170k employees and about 800k revenue/employee (less than half) and about 100k/employee in profit in 2021 (2019/2020 were MUCH lower profit). The main issue with the concept - is done alone, it is unlikely to make that company be competitive. With a lack of investors willing to invest - as they are a low priority in this scheme - if they come on real tough times, it will be very difficult to access capital markets for investments or acquisitions. Also, they might be lacking in capital to invest in machinery, expansion or other non manpower areas that could impact their long term competitiveness. Generally the concept of distributable profits is a risky proposition. Companies rarely make the same revenue and profit year for year, and stock valuation - it's own risk factor. Financial investors are inherently versed in this risk and dealing with it. Employees of a company on their own are not able to have a large impact on the companies financial performance - and having a large portion of their pay be dependent on that - is potentially a bigger risk than they are willing to take. Agreeing to work for wag X for a set number of hours puts less of the "unternehm risiko" on the employee on the up and the down side. There is ample evidence out there that Germany has not seen wage or wealth growth in the past 30yrs at the level that it did the 30yrs before that. The Unions did not strike very often - and they were very moderate in their salary demands to "keep Germany competitive" - other than some feeling of "job safety" - they have very little to show for that.

[@stephenmcnamara8318]

And the latest German Economic numbers are a catastrophe - with a contraction in the economy of 3.7% - meaning -3.7% growth in GDP. Some of these ideas come from well meaning intention - but the results do not seem to be a great path forward. Also - do not forget 48% of all employed people in Germany make less than 3k€/month - that is far from being a high wage level - and you have a huge portion of the population with no to low savings or wealth (due to low home ownership) The system did well for a long time - and it does protect from abject poverty - but it is not seeing huge wealth and well-being growth.

[@Machtmirdochegal]

Unions are obviously not perfect but they are a checks and balance system even if imperfect because it allows bigger leverage to improve working conditions. I think that people complaining about how the union doesn’t benefit them in this way actually can mean that the base level they ensure has gotten so normal that people don’t even recognize its particular value and that would be a success on the part of the union. Unions aren’t necessarily there for managing the good times, they’re more the surgeon you need when you need to ensure a standard in the bad times and if you don’t notice their work it’s generally a good thing. There’s always room for improvement and complacency is dangerous but it’s been way worse before unions have become a lever and reminding yourself of that occasionally doesn’t hurt.

[@barbariandude]

Watching the Tesla vs IF Metall dispute in Sweden is fascinating. The cross-union solidarity is pretty incredible. The dockworkers union, completely unrelated to the dispute, is now threatening to block all Tesla imports into the country if Tesla doesn't quit their shit and negotiate in good faith. EDIT: Should also mention that the Swedish system is pretty unusual. There is no national minimum wage, pension or health & safety legislation. Everything about that is negotiated at the union level. Basically, without a negotiation with IF Metall, Tesla repair shops have no minimum wage, pensions or H&S rules. That's why this is important for them.

[@Hans-gb4mv]

Funny you should mention Tesla, because the UAW dispute highlights one of the bigger problems with enterprise level bargaining. The big 3 that have unions are becoming noncompetitive because of the unions.

[@victorcapel2755]

@@Hans-gb4mv Yes yes, very uncompetitive. Never mind that Stellantis have a profit margin almost twice that of Tesla...

[@Novusod]

@@Hans-gb4mv The unions are basically putting the legacy automakers out of business. Tesla and Toyota which don't have unions are celebrating. Nobody is going to pay a hundred grand for a Ford or Chevy.

[@ihatebudweiser]

The channel Robe Trotting has a video about McD vs Danish Unions, and how McD was kinda forced to give in to letting fast food workers in their danish restaurants unionize.

[@kronop8884]

@@ihatebudweiser Toys R Us tried the same thing back in 1995 in Sweden but were swiftly brought to their knees by the Unions when they tried to introduce US working conditions.

[@Kian139]

Unions can also serve different function than full on collective bargaining. A union can be the insurance from employers not honoring the agreement. Advice on contracts and individual negotiations. They can also form partnerships with companies who wants the "workers voice" to improve and stabilise their company. Employee trustees and Safety trustees can greatly improve collaboration and ensure that important issues are not lost in the numerous management levels. Employee/manager conflicts can be resolved with the assistance of worker trustees and higher management levels. My own Danish union is not big on collective bargaing, but on all the other topics they are extremely good. They are specialized in a specific sector, so they know what is going on and can assist members and local worker trustees. They do wage statistics that are really usefull in individual bargaining. The crazy thing is that private employers are not the difficult ones. Its government employers that are hard to deal with.

[@debbie_target]

Here I am sitting as an IG Metall member in difficult times with 52 negative hours, whose employer has been on short-time work since Thursday until March 2024 and watching this video. Many companies in my region are in a similar situation. The visible involvement of labor unions in the process is different. My employer doesn't offer the collective agreement.

[@gerhardbrey3524]

Very interesting and well researched, as usual. For Germany, I have missed mentioning the role of the worker's councils. They are being elected per a company's locations, usually amongst union members, and they form a company worker's Council, the head of which, at least in stock corporations, becomes deputy chairman of the supervisory board with a lot of responsibility for both the workforce and the company. (Actually the non-German workforce is not represented in this system, just compare with the German Aktiengesetz and the Mitbestimmungsgesetz) In my company, we even have a similar system to represent the managerial workforce, again per location. They are not union members though but work together if deemed necessary on a case by case basis.

[@reinhard8053]

Same in Austria.

[@michaelmedlinger6399]

I realize you are talking about two different things here, but I would just point out to the non-German readers that the works councils do in fact represent non-Germans as well. I served on the works council and the joint works council where I worked years ago, and I was not German at that time. A works council that didn‘t represent non-German workers would have been senseless as it was a language school and the overwhelming majority of the employees were non-German. But you are of course correct; this is a different kettle of fish.

[@gerhardbrey3524]

​@michaelmedlinger6399 ...yes, you are absolutely right. The worker's councils represent all workers of a company at a certain location in Germany (!) regardless of nationality. What I wanted to say was that the "jurisdiction" of the German unions is not extended to workers of a company outside of Germany. Sorry for the misunderstanding 🤔

[@MADHIKER777]

In the US, management's only concern is the closing stock price at the end of the day. Top managers have a golden parachute of things don't go well. In addition, it seems a large segment of companies are actually owned by financial holding companies, who have nothing to do with the product or the workers.

[@jackdekraaij603]

I think it is all an extension of the 'Rhineland model' of capitalism, that is prevalent in the northern half of Europe. Cooperation to achieve mid-term shared goals is the standard (like employment, skill development, etc.) and promoted by governments. Employees are not just 'resources' but also stakeholders. In the Netherlands it is even mandatory for larger companies to have a 'company council' where colleagues are elected to discuss strategic plans that affect working conditions.

[@seanboldt266]

Great content! I’m reminded of Thomas Geoghegen’s book title, We’re You Born on the Wrong Continent?

[@firenter]

Belgian here! When I learned that American unions work on a per company basis I immediately understood why they don't work, the collective bargaining power is severely reduced. Meanwhile over here we have tiers of unions: there are unions at both the sectoral and national level and every sectoral union is part of a national union and so greater cooperation can be achieved so *everyone* can benefit, not just union workers.

[@peterdonecker6924]

Again, you pretty much nailed it, Ashton. Great research and even a phantastic and entertaining presentation, cudos😊 And as some others already stated, this all is based on a regulation, that cares about the interest of employees.

[@MrFlo5787]

I am glad that Sagaftra do whats right and show the power of unions.

[@mardasman428]

What is interesting is that Germany bans political union strikes. This makes unions a generally practical and apolitical force exclusively about wages and working conditions. The opposite example is France, where the unions are highly politicized and are extremely aggressive with strike actions with regards to political reforms that affect anything remotely tied to workers. Some of these unions are far-left and extremely radical, which makes them so far-removed from the apolitical industrial relations aspect that we see in Germany. I honestly think that the German system of an incorporation of unions into the decisionmaking processes of companies is a much better system than the French one, as it deescalates politics, while favoring a productive, constructive relationship between workers and employers that actually leads to much less strikes on average compared to France or even the United States. I am not sure however if it's always good to have a national wage system, at least for a national economy as a whole. Individual workers certainly benefit from it, but it may also lead to a system where people cannot effectively compete for better wages based on better work performance. My ex-girlfriend was an extremely hard worker, but her pay was exactly the same as her lazy colleague, and there was absolutely no way that she could gain a higher wage in her field, which can be pretty frustrating. And the economy as a whole might suffer from extremely high labor costs, as there is no way to reduce wages except by finding loopholes in the way people get paid. Germany has such a loophole, the "520-Euro-Job", which doesn't lead to a stable job market, but a highly deregulated shadow market of sorts. So nationalized union wage contracts are still getting undermined by these kinds of loopholes.

[@jerefab]

Unions have done a lot of good in Finland but now they are beginning to be a hindarence in a job market. And they do not seem to realize this. Hopefully our Unions start to move towards more European or atleast Scandinavian approach.

[@Dutch1961]

I've been a union member for 41 years this year. Mind you, I'm with my third employer in 42 years. My first employer I worked 19 years for. My second employer "only" 5 years and my third employer 18 years coming december. In all my life I've been unemployed for 3 months. That was when I left the army as a concript and had to find a job to start my working career.

[@michaelrosner8868]

Great one, once again. Thank you so much. I wonder what would be the unionization in law enforcement? I guess there might be Bette quote of organization? Could be motivation for other branches?

[@simrock_]

From a German perspective it depends on which industry you work in and which job you do in said industry. If you are doing the "core" job in an industry unions can be very beneficial, if you are working in more of a better salaried support role working in that industry can bite you back. Case in point, recently I was employed by the insurance industry in an IT role. The insurance industry has an industry wide union contract, which is nice for the regular insurance employees, it just did not at all cover the higher salaries offered for IT jobs. Contract negotiation was not a thing because HR just went and said, nah we've got this union thing, we negotiate with them every couple of years and that's what you get. It did not help, that said union only managed to a 2% raise during a 10%+ inflation year. And to add insult to injury the union blamed the poor results on the employees. Personally I am never again working in a union contract framework after that experience, even though it is nice to "automatically" get a letter saying your salary is up, your new salary is xyz each year.

This is unfortunately self-fulfilling on both ends. The unions don't really represent the tech world (due to our tri-modal nature of software engineering salaries, there's an excellent blog post about that), and so they fail to attract members, which in turn means they're not the represented, etc. I wonder if similar to the pilots etc the tech world needs a dedicated union rather than being represented inside the existing ones on the margins.

[@alastairhewitt380]

Thank you for everything you do

[@TypeAshton]

I appreciate that! Thanks!

[@pkorobase]

Hello Ashton, thank you for this informative video. I'm a software engineer in a midsized company in germany (about 4000 emp.) and we dont have a bargaining contract (kein Tarifvertrag). So some years ago i founded workers council to improve working conditions. It did have a dramatic effect, among others a massive professionalisation of the management. but i would like to share another thought. i would say one of the biggest differences between german and the us economy when considering the training of the workforce is that in germany not only academic education is considered qualified. especially in the IT industry we have growing tendency to have not only academic computer science BA or MA personal, but there is also an increasing number of vocational trained programmers. This means that the number of unfinished education is gradually replaced by this vocational training. that improves the job opportunities of these people, and the transferability to other companies. so we have a higher number of trainined persons with a well defined education. this is very important for the growing number of cloud workers, that otherwise have only bad expectations for a secured income.

[@urlauburlaub2222]

That's partly nonsense. A worker council has nothing to do with unions. Having worker councils does not make the salary and job chances better, because you don't pay on performance, but formal qualifications, so you won't get performance, just in "allowing unfinished studied workers", because you think you can't pay them right. This is typical for such companies, and they fail in the market.

[@SharienGaming]

*sigh* im in the same boat and i kinda wish there was an overarching software dev union... while i dont have any issues with my employer and they are more than accomodating towards workers and allow for a high level of worker control/involvement in management... i just hate having to do the pay negotiation talk every year and would love for that to just be taken care of by people who are actually good at it, so i can go back to being a happy little introvert

[@HelmutQ]

@@SharienGaming Negotiating your personal salary is unpleasant for psychologically agreeable people, but something that cannot be delegated. A trade union can never ask for more money to you as compared to your co-worker simply because you are essential to the company. They present you just like your co-worker. Agreeableness is negatively correlated with professional success.

[@SharienGaming]

@@HelmutQ thats complete bollocks - they can negotiate much better than me...they have the leverage of numbers, negotiation expertise and people with a more suitable mentality to this kind of stuff you are just promoting the cutthroat individuality garbage thats massively to the benefit of exploitative employers united we bargain - divided we beg.

[@rizaldyvelasco205]

I am Glad That You have Uploaded This Video. Here In The Philippines. Only Few Companies Have Labor Unions..... I am one of The lucky Ones who are Union Member...... Most Companies Here are Hiring Contractual Workers from Labor Agencies, instead of Hiring directly. This results to lower wages to the workers, That also results to Low Quality Output and Productivity. I will Share Your Video to My fellow Union Members. It's a Good Video To Watch. I hope That You Make More video Like This.... Thank You Very Much.

[@rmamon2554]

I find the word that we use in Austria for our industrial relations so nice and fitting which is being called social partnership. The thing I find nice in that wording is that it symbolizes the reason for all that heckle. Yes, you may be not agree but in the end the company you work for is every staffs members bread maker and that means you need compromise. Instead of going the way you against them.

[@KHValby]

Grüße aus Dänemark 💗! As always, I'm a fan of your Vlog 😁! And again your spot on 😄! Not saying that being unionized makes my country and Finland among the happiest in the World, but it helps 😁😁😁

[@TypeAshton]

Thank you! 😃

[@Why-D]

Unions in Germany fought for democracy in the 19th century. In our companies, the Betriebsrat would be something like a "Company-union". In Germany a union agreement is only valid for the whole sector, if the coverd companies are a big majority, as it was in mail delivery. For packages, the German Post tried it, but they had not the majority.

[@petersfluege]

You do a great job. 👋👌👍

Unions are unfortunately also not very popular in the tech sector. People all believe they don't need them until after they did. Plus, in a global organization with employees forming a team from dozens of countries, unions that represent only one country are a more difficult sell 😐

[@brodriguez11000]

Gaming industry.

[@EmpReb]

And software devs have earn way better than average too and Europe has basically been behind the US ruthless market when it come to technology probably because of how competitive and NONunionized the industry is in the US.

[@joshg8250]

Very thankful US tech is not unionized. I'm 25, work in software, high income, high net worth, great relationship with my employer. If someone suggested to me to join a union, I would probably laugh at them.

[@CrownRider]

It's Rhineland capitalism versus Anglo American capitalism: People versus profit.

[@scottsoutham825]

I didn't even realise sectoral bargaining was not how it works in the USA.

[@kojut2707]

Great video, as always. I live in Ireland and unions in this country are very strong, but they cooperate with employers and trying to get the best possible deal for working people. We have national minimum wage, but also different sectors have their own minimums thanks to unions. We will have also something what in continental Europe is normal: - sick leave paid from first day (capped to 70% or €110 per day).

[@Jakob_DK]

What is sick leave? Leave when you have to take care of your children?

[@ArmAlKay]

My take: The US corporate sector is much more hierarchical and based on authority derived from the level within the hierarchy. So co-operation is not an option because „managers know better“. After all they have a better education. In Germany Mitbestimmung (co-determination) forces management to sit down with their employees (not only union members) to work out the best solution in both interests. Elitist education system in the US versus lack of it in Germany is another important factor. In Germany the future „elite“ will share schools with people of all levels in the society and will be able to communicate effectively.

[@lhpl]

Good news from USA sometimes seems to be becoming more and more rare, so when there is some, it is worth celebrating. Cheers! Note that the government does not necessarily have to be involved in the dealings between employer's sector organisations and sector unions. Although some things have been transferred into law (like the rules for salaried functionaries - but not the actual salary rates, which is still negotiated by unions, or individually) most of the rules have been outlined and agreed upon in "Hovedaftalen" (the "Main Agreement") dating back to 1899! It sets the framework for the bargaining between employers and their organisations and workers and their unions. For government-scared Americans, I would think such an arrangement would simply be the bee's knees. Of course this requires one fundamental insight, which I think you hinted at, but maybe didn't explain in enough detail, so I'll try putting it in one paragraph: It is a fundamental mistake to think of productivity and business as a competition between individuals. That could be true in a primitive society, where trade happens between individuals, or families or households (farms, estates) - maybe. But with the earliest technology (probably as early as flint tools in the stone age, or maybe even earlier with fiber processing for textiles and ropes, or even tanning of skins) came two things: specialisation and education (specialist knowledge transfer). It seems obvious that if a good flint toolsmith trains apprentices, more and better tools can be produced, and the skill isn't lost when the experienced toolsmith dies. And even a good smith will be interested in learning a new technique invented by another toolsmith, even if they are also competitors. So transfering this insight to the modern world: Even if companies in a sector are competing in a market, they all depend on qualified and educated employees to do things, and they share the pool of these employees. It is in the employees interest that the company he works for has success, because that means his job is secure, and his wage may even go up. It is in the company's interest, that the employee is paid a fair wage and the means to live a good life, be happy and get training and education to keep up, because he will be more productive. It is in all employers' interest that there is a infrastructure and a well-functioning transport sector to move their products, and an educational system that ensures availability of educated employees - and, dare I say it, a health system that allows everyone to never have to worry about how to handle medical problems. I sometimes get the impression, that the conservative Americans who are most against government and any kind of "socialism", are also those who speak highly of "communities", like their churches, family, sports team, etc. But such communities are basically social(ist)! It is simply a mistake to think that your personal success is opposed to the success of everyone else, or to common success. I often wonder where that mistake originates. One last thing: In Denmark, the unemployment insurance is no longer strongly associated with the unions, although there is often tight cooperation. But you are free to choose to be a member of a union (or none), and an "A-kasse" (insurance), and both are typically member-owned private institutions. Even if your union cooperates with a particular A-kasse, you can might a different one. Also, there may be more than one union that organises employees for some sector. An IT person would be able to choose either the IT-union, the IT-section of the Trade and Office Worker's Union, or an academic or engineering union. We also have cross-sector unions, like Krifa, which claims to be a "Christian Union".

[@urlauburlaub2222]

This is mostly not true. A worker is oriented in getting a salary, he is not an owner. So, basically your whole midsection is not relevant at all. As an owner is interested in also earning money, they have other incentives. The main goal must be to avoid opposite incentives. In the US, there is no overall incentive unlike to ethnic Nation states and communities in Europe. However, you also have Socialist nation states in Europe, where these incentives are forced. But that can only lead towards killing the most productive cow and performance, so Denmark and the UK are prime examples for that and Democrat run countries in the US. A community is anything but Socialist. Social and Socialist are different things.

[@lhpl]

@@urlauburlaub2222 I find it impossible to take you seriously when you put Denmark in the same category as the UK.

[@maudeboggins9834]

documentary film maker Michael Moore from Flint Michigan said in the 1950's when he was born 30% of the work force belonged to unions, not including Federal workers. The population was about 160,000,000 Now in 2023 6% of the work force belongs to unions.

[@lhpl]

That made me chuckle. :-) In the 40es and 50es, maybe even into the 60es and 70es, USA was fairly "normal" (seen from another Western/European cultural viewpoint). Henry Agard Wallace, who was secretary of agriculture 1933-1940, vice president of FDR 1941-1945, and secretary of commerce 1945-1946, was a progressive democrat and could probably be called a socialist or social democrat by modern European standards. Then came the "Reaganomics" of the 80es, I guess, and all was lost and forgotten. It is _so_ ironic that you will often see conservative republicans, MAGAns etc who express a yearning for "the good old days", not realising how many things were actually far more like "evil socialist" Europe back then. The idea that "united we stand, divided we fall" is ancient, and was even put into the _Liberty Song- by your Founding Father John Dickinson in 1768. USA even has "United" in the name! But I must assume that this is much like various socalled "socialist" totalitarian dictatures with "Democratic" in their name.

[@Sgb-oq3oy]

I never belonged to a union. I worked for five corporations in my career and each one of them were good companies, with good wages and benefits. I do not like unions. I have seen them ruin some companies by making them less competitive with high labor costs and bad rules. The teachers unions in the U.S. ruined the education of students during the pandemic by keeping schools closed. It appeared that the unions cared more for the teachers than for the students. Businesses are formed to make money, not to create jobs. When people become too expensive, employers look to technology to save money. There are self-checkout registers in super markets and kiosks which get rid of workers. What is the affect of those changes on unions? When the cost of doing business goes up, it affects retirees like me because the food and products cost more and people on fixed incomes suffer.

[@michaelthomas7898]

Some states have a prevailing wage that needs to be met in order to protect the workers' paycheck. However, these are only found in basically union states, and only on city and state jobs. I've been in a construction union for most of my life, with a great wage, health insurance, pension and safety programs. I don't know why anyone would do anything else. Crazy the differences that I have seen.

[@SuperNovaJinckUFO]

This all just goes to show. It's not about businesses and business owners vs employees. It's about everybody working to build a stronger economy, and ensure everyone's prosperity.

[@taiwanisacountry]

Gere in Denmark our unions have frequent discussion with our poltiicians because they represent the workers of their union. This also means that bosses and companies have unions. Because collective bargaining also benefits company owners. So they also have a seat at the discussions between worker's unions and the company unions. This way both sides get a say. And yeah our system is also built on unions. In Sweden they also have a "renter's" union. That helps protect the rights of the people renting. We are also sectorial, and it is big sectors. Such as all retail and office jobs.

[@lhpl]

We actually have "renter's unions" (for people living in rented homes) in Denmark too. Not all people seem to know this. I joined one when I rented a flat from the owner for a limited period, because she wanted to sell it, but was hoping the 2008 financial crisis would resolve fast. I was looking to by something myself, so the obvious solution would be to buy it from her, we were negotiating that, and had actually agreed on the deal, only I would need a loan from the bank, so, advised by my lawyer, I had made the deal depend on that this went through. Surprise - and it was a big surprise - I was fired, and of course the bank would then not finance me buying the flat - so I told her so, and moved out after the originally agreed rental period of 6 months. The flat was in pristine or better condition (I had washed and treated all the wooden floors according to specs, and they looked great!) But she was angry and delayed transfering back my deposit. It just took a call to the renter's union and then their legal department effected the prompt transfer of my money. That would not be the last time I had their assistance, and since then I have always recommended that people who rent their home join the renter's union. They will also go through a rental contract (if it is not an unmodified standard contract that follows the law-mandated rules) to ensure you are not tricked out of your rights. We also have various "Patients unions", for people with various chronic illnesses, who will support members if the need to complain about a treatment, and also try to promote the patients' interests politically, facilitate networking among people who share some affliction, etc. I guess there is a reason we sometimes call Denmark "foreningernes land" ("the land of unions and associations"), a random citizen is probably a member of ten or more unions and associations of various kinds. There is even a saying/joke that: "If two Danes meet, they drink a beer. If three Danes meet, they start an association."

[@taiwanisacountry]

@@lhpl ah LLO. Yeah here in Sweden they are actually called a union, that might be why I did not think of LLO as a union. Patientforeningen, looks like an organisation that want to push a narrative of increases to private hospitals. One of the articles that the link to claims that private hospitals are 50% cheaper to than public hospitals. Unless it is another organisation you were thinking of then that just seems like a business union rather than a collection created to fight for the right of patients, and tell them about their legal rights.

[@lhpl]

@@taiwanisacountry You are absolutely right about that particular organisation. Quoting CEPOS is usually a telltale sign that there is a christian-libertarian-(ultra/neoliberal)-conservative agenda behind. Looking up the owner of the website domain and checking him out - I'll just say it confirms this suspicion. But then - that's how it works - if you are not satisfied with your union/association and can't get enough democratic leverage to change things from the inside, you can always start a new one. Happens all the time. I wasn't a member of LLO, but of "Århus Lejerforening", which was formed exactly for such a reason. I actually thought they had rejoined in the meantime, but on the contrary, it would seem that a later local branch of LLO has also broken off recently. I think I have been the member of at least four unions/associations of _very_ diverse kinds, where this has happened at least once in their history; sometimes while I was a member. This is probably also the reason why we have so many different political parties in Denmark. I wonder what to call it: "free market socialism"? "competitive socialism"? ;-) It stands in stark contrast to socalled "communist states" with just one party - and with just two parties of significance, USA is hardly any better. :-) On the subject of patients unions, there is also Danske patientforeninger, which is an umbrella organisation of 130 smaller patient organisations, which makes a lot of sense. Just like individuals gain by joining forces, so do small organisations. Many medical conditions are rare and an organisation focused on a rare condition will of course have few members. Others like diabetes, are common, and as a result Diabetesforeningen probably has a lot of members. By joining forces, the small organisations can benefit from the strengths of the larger ones. And many of their objectives will be the same anyway. Workers' Unions do the same, both nationally and internationally with for example ETUC. In Denmark, until recently we had two umbrella organisations for unions: LO and FTF, but they fused in 2019 and are now called FH (Fagbevægelsens Hovedorganisation; "Head Organisation of the Trade Union Movement" or something like that. It makes me happy that they haven't given in to the stupid trend in Denmark to give everything new names in English.)

[@chrisgoetsch1964]

I've only worked for 1 company with a union years ago in the early 90s. The company was called IBP back then which is now a food processing company that begins with T in their name. The union steward did minimal negotiating and when all was said and done the steward told us that if we didn't take what they were offering the plant would be moved south of the U.S. border.

[@natashaowens8780]

One pivotal difference you did no cover here is. "Employ at will." In the US, a boss can decide that they don't like the look on John's face "John, your fired". And their is zero comeback for that. Unless a specific contract is in place providing job security, which very few American's have, then the boss can fire you for any reason except those covered by law (Race, Religion etc). Americans workers know this, and this restrains their behaviour. Telling the boss they are talking shit in the US is asking to get fired, in Europe it might get you a disciplinary hearing (which the boss might not want if they really are talking shit). This means that American workers are more "subservient" in the workplace than Europeans. When you are used to knuckling under and just "going along to get along" then turning around and joining a union or supporting industrial action while the bosses are ranting and raving about how this will cause X Y Z issues, and knowing that that same boss can remember that "YOU" were one of the people supporting things.... Yea. That's hard.

[@alaksiejstankievicx]

In Germany there is also Work Council (Betriebsrat), which can be created in establishment even with 5 employees. WoCo cannot negotiate salaries or start strike (this is sphere of trade unions), however it right of co-determination in many aspects of what going on in establishment, e.g. if employer want have On-Call policy, resulting policy will be product of negotiations between WoCo and employer and so on.

[@JosephSolisAlcaydeAlberici]

Labor unions work when there is multigenerational labor scarcity that the United States doesn't have as American companies may compensate labor scarcity through allowing cheap skilled workers from Latin America and Asia to come into the United States, so diminishing the demographic bargaining power of native-born Americans vis-a-vis to big corporations.

[@knuthenriksommer4982]

As far as I could understand from the video, she was talking about sectorial barganing later being rolled out by government as mandatory conditions and wages for all workers in a sector. This of course also applies to immigrant workers. In my country, Norway, it’s illegal to hire workers on worse conditions than the collective agreements no matter where they come from. Employers trying to do anything like this would be given huge fines or even risk prison. Laws like this pretty much elimimates your problem. You are pointing to a problem that only exist when you organize labour in the american way. Also: This only goes for workers from the Schengen-area. For employing workers from outside this area the company has to provide evidence that they can’t get skilled norwegian workers to do the job. Only exception here is seasonal workers in agriculture and «ethnic chefs». The documentation requirements for the last group is very strict. In Norway the government and not the companies decides if we should import labour (outside Schengen). It’s maybe not possible in the US now, but believe it or not: Politicians are allowed to change laws and you get the politicians that you vote for. Trying to make hiring cheap labour from abroad to step on workers rights would just cause a complete general strike in all sectors in Norway or more probably be stopped by employers themselves to avoid such extreme consequences.

[@cloudyskies5497]

I am covered by a clerical union contract in a Rust Belt state in the US. I get ten days off each for vacation and sick days a year, and I have to accrue it first. The big difference is I am hired full-time, in a clerical position that has slow periods and slam periods. Before moving north, I was in a "right to work" state. I looked for similar jobs back there. Most of them were not hiring full-time, at most 75% time, which means a reduction in benefits such as health insurance, if not slashing them altogether. Of course you were still expected to do the same amount of work. I am also protected from getting fired, which means I can refuse when unfair workloads are asked of me and my boss will accept it because he doesn't want me to contact my union. Our employer rewarded the supervisors (in other words, those not unioned) with five weeks of vacation a year, to try to make it look like unions are bad. But I know better.

[@Lobos222]

In Norway you have 3 parts. The government, employee unions and employer unions. The maximum wage increase for any occupation on the standard rates is often in regards to what the export side of the nation gets. Then more domestic aspects are negotiated in context of that. That way you wont set the national economy in danger, while still retaining middle class buying power. Having a nation wide sized employer union, not every company is Apple sized,... also helps communicate to companies that the middle class need to retain buying power if they also are supposed to buy domestic products. Many companies rather see 1% reduction in margin than going bust for lack of demand. That said, the employer union always talk publicly like they cant afford anything. Ironically, middle management is less protected in Norway, I think. You can have a situation that someone comes in from another company, has less experience than you, less schooling and less time in the company, but the local worker union just agree that one can look past time spent in the company for middle management when it comes to downsizing. Suddenly someone that has driven a truck xx year in *another company* gets more "points" on worthiness in job they actually beat people with more time in the company, masters and or specialized education. Which is kinda insane because it actually means you kick out the professor to keep the apprentice via proclaiming the apprentice has more expertise, which obviously is not correct.

[@RealConstructor]

In The Netherlands we have the same system as in France. Sectoral bargaining by unions and the sectoral agreement is declared general binding for the whole sector by the minister of Social Affairs. But we have a low union representation, some sectors, like commercial sectors, are below 20%, only in government sectors the union representation is high, above 40 or 50%, like in education, public transport, healthcare, emergency services etc. But with a low representation it is strange that a sectoral labor agreement is general binding for the whole sector.

[@jellehelsen3222]

In Belgium we not only have sectorial bargaining, but also inter-sectorial bargaining. Every few years the 3 major unions and the 3 major employer representatives together with the government negotiate an inter-sectorial contract which sets the national minimum. After that, the sectorial negotians can only improve on that agreement. It's also worth mentioning that national unions can fight for more than just labor relations. In Belgium, ordinary people have voting rights because of unions and national strikes in the late 1800's and early 1900's. A corporate union is a nuisance for companies, a national union can be a political powerhouse.

[@scottt5521]

I worked for the 3rd largest public utility in in America. My local president had a saying "its a time card, not a work card" so don't knock yourself out working too hard. One time he proudly described how he just won a dispute with the company, which wanted to fire a small crew of 4 workers. They had got drunk on the job, rolled their $280k vehicle over and into a ditch, then went to a bar and drank some more, still on the clock, During the Great Recession (2008-2010) auto workers in the US were protected by a labor union contract which stated that if a company closed a factory then they had to pay the workers 90% of their pay for a year as a severance package. This discouraged the automakers from closing plants and laying off workers, since there would be little savings for the first year. So the auto makers continued to produce more vehicles than could be sold and the inventory of unsold autos backlog soared. The losses just at GM soared to $38.7 Billion in 2007 and $31 billion dollars for 2008. There were many reasons for this monster loss, not just cost of labor, but continuing to produce more autos than could be sold was a big part of it. Auto makers and the US government had pulled forward many sales with various incentives (loose credit requirements, "Cash for Clunkers") of up to $10,000 a vehicle until there was just no one left to buy and auto sales crashed to a 27 year low. Also, by the time 2009 was over, 27 automotive suppliers had gone bankrupt and 1,605 car dealerships had closed. Failure to curtail production was a disaster and the union contract was the biggest reason.

[@peterfireflylund]

This should be the top comment.

[@annekekramer3835]

So.... in your story, it was the UNION'S fault for a total of 70 billion loss, because the company could not fire the employees. Let's see how the math works out. GM had about 100.000 employees in 2008, so divide those numbers and we see that every single employee earned 350.000 dollars per year, does that sound correct to you? Not to me either. Conclusion, it was NOT because they could not fire the employees. Guys, do you really only believe the lies companies tell you? Really? And even if, even IF GM had a 70 B loss, the company is still alive today. Looks to me they could easily shoulder the loss, while those workers, who live paycheck to paycheck could not. And now the real numbers: 2009 they had a 7.6 B loss and in 2010 a 16.6 B profit. In 2011 a 19.1 B profit. Guys, do the research, don't believe those corporate lies.

[@dksilber9500]

I have always had a strong relationship with trade unions. My parents and relatives, although they worked as an authorized representative at Deutsche Bank and as a teacher (and therefore with very good salaries), were all union members and also members of the Social Democratic Party of Germany. And although I am a civil servant and don't actually need a union (after all, I'm not allowed to strike) and my advantage or possible advantage is probably rather small, I am of course a member - also so that my membership fees can be used for those in my union who don't have civil servant status but are employees. Solidarity is more important to me than saving the membership fee (around 160 euros a year).

[@nunyabidness3075]

All through the 70’s and 80’s my parents paid stupid money for terrible union made cars. Then, tax dollars were needed to bail out Chrysler to save union jobs. The victims of the bargaining power of unions were never the executives and managers willing to work in a unionized environment (a generally less able sort of leader), nor was it really the stockholders beyond ones hit by shocks of the takeover and strikes. The real victims were non unionized employees and the customers. Having the government extend the union wages to the rest of the industry is simply preventing those out of the union from escaping by avoiding union businesses. In other words, it’s keeping customers ignorant of their victimhood. It’s simply going back to the guild systems of medieval Europe which destroyed innovation and eventually led to the USA becoming the dominant industrial power. We should greatly reform our taxes and labor laws to favor competition and individual achievement again so we can once again become the dominant manufacturing center of the world. We should not go back to feudalism.

[@karinland8533]

Union made cars?🤣

[@nunyabidness3075]

@@karinland8533 What is it you find funny or inaccurate?

[@charlesunderwood6334]

You've really fallen for the 'war on the poor' disinformation.

[@houghi3826]

There is a difference in the Guilds and the Unions. A Guild does it to protect the job. A unions, does it to protect the worker. In Europe, Guilds were something that already existed in the middle ages. They were pretty powerful. A Union also means it is a bout "workers", not a about "the worker at job X" be that a specific job or a specific location. I can join a union the moment I am of legal working age, regardless of my job or even IF I have a job. There are still type of Gullds, but many will be under the umbrella of a larger union. Living in a country that has the Ghent model, when I had to fire somebody (it happens), at that talk I always explained that if they were in a Union, they should go there for their unemployment benefits, and if they did not, to join one. That way they would get it immediately. No need to be an asshole. When asked which one, I told them to go for the one they have the easiest access to. There are 4 big ones where I live. You just go into the office, show your paper that you where fired, show your bank account and ID, sign a paper and you are a member getting that money paid. And if you want to leave, you will just tell them. As easy as joining a gym and easier to leave. As somebody who was in a position to hire people, I never was even remotely interested if somebody was in a Union or not. There was no difference, the person was allowed to lie about it and the person could enter and leave on a daily basis. So even if it were true at that specific time, time it could NOT be true an hour or day or year later. And yes there are also Unions that tailor more towards the manager and the CEO. And st ill those people have often the same minimal benefits as the workers, like paid holiday and what not. INCLUDING overtime pay rules. The fact that they often not follow them is THEIR fault. You can not sign those rights away. There have been situations where high up managers in big companies asked for their overpay (mostly right before they went on retirement) and each time the excuse "but it says so in your contract" was invalid. Company had to pay and if you do that over say 5 years, that can become a nice extra bonus, as it will also include any bonuses paid in that period to the person, as well as extra other payments to the government. I do not know who is a Union Member where I work (besides the representatives). I do not care. When a company is bigger than 50, there needs to be representatives. That means a monthly meeting (I think) between the higher management and the union. It almost always is a positive result for all in the long term.

[@reneolthof6811]

This is a really good point - the difference between Guilds and Unions. In the entertainment industry the strike is organised by a Writers' Guild whose sole purpose is to protect the rights of the Writers.

[@m.a.6478]

I come from Switzerland and here sectorial bargaining is very common. Unemployment is insured by a mandatory public (=publicly owned) insurance, one of the few public insureances we have here (EO). The same goes for the basic pension (AHV) long term work inability insurance (IV) and accidents insurance (SUVA). This gives the unions much less benefits they could offer, hence they are much less powerful compared to e.g. France. On the other hand there is a sort of a peace agreement between unions and companies, therefore strikes are not very common. Employment is also much less protected in Switzerland than for example in France or Germany. This protects the companies from financial problems as they can lay off workforce without extensive reasoning. There they have to take into account a period of 3 months normally (depending the contract). This balance kept things quite stable and people are generally happy with it.

[@foobarFR]

7:36 Fun fact : sectoral CBAs in France were historically caused... by union busting. French companies in the early XXth century desperatly wanted to keep unions OUT of their shops, because unions (actually, union, singular, at those times there was only the CGT) at those times were radicals. They thought that sectoral negociations would be more pacific and easier to manage.

[@Runenschuppe]

Collective/sector bargaining has its downsides of course. Generally it is great at ensuring a certain stability and minimum income. But it has its difficulties to account for individual or local situations (i.e. getting paid the exact same whether you live in LA or West Virginia would have a very pronounced impact on your respective living standard). By virtue of the collective bargaining, contracts need to paint with large brushes and focus on the lowest common denominator. Employers still face the exact same pressure as in the US to keep wages down which rather then targeting non-union members comes into effect when it comes to raising an employee's salary above the union guaranteed contractual level. So unless you get some sort of promotion or your employer gets creative on how to measure your employment time in the sector, it is hard to negotiate salary increases. And of course there are structural problems with big organisations like sector-wide unions. They become bureaucratic, get misused by high-ranking members as personal advancement tools instead of catering to the members benefits and have the power to make decisions for their sector which are detrimental to the workers. And I'm saying that as a German union member.

[@stevenscoggin7441]

One problem with joining some unions is getting membership. I tried to join the electricians union, the iron worker, and equipment operators union out after 12.5 years of military service and was denied by all.

[@yllynnallaniaris9472]

Even if we ignore salaries and benefits, unions prevent this hire and fire approach, which is good for the industry in the long run. Because only when workers are in a company long enough they can acquire the skills needed to work really well and effectively. No exaggeration: in every video I see on a similar topic (including this one) I recognize a lot of machines built in Germany in the film sequences over and over again. I've asked around, with people who have the background knowledge, why they don't just build these things themselves, it would be much cheaper. And the answer is always the same: they can't. They don't have enough workers with the necessary skills to achieve this precision and reliability. That's crazy. (Almost) anyone can learn anything, they just have to have the opportunity and the will to do so. But you don't have that if you're just being exploited and your job isn't secure enough. So maybe the US will forever be dependent on importing European manufacturing equipment. Good for us, but pretty short-sighted of the American companies.

[@peterfireflylund]

No, everyone can’t learn anything - and it’s not even close. IQ is real (and mostly genetic).

[@BulletRain100]

The hire and fire approach is only seen in retail and service industries where labor with no skills can easily be turned into workers. It has largely disappeared in manufacturing industries because manufacturing has gotten complex over the years that worker experience matters a great deal. Reducing employee turnover is a key goal in manufacturing and companies do what they can to keep employees even if there is no union in the factory. A key challenge that advocates for unions have is that they are arguing for fixing problems that disappeared decades ago and are completely disconnected from the employees they are trying to help.

[@shadeblackwolf1508]

I think the WGA is the model. The USA needs sector level unions and maybe even cross-sectoral (ae stare or national level) unions, to feed a proper national labor movement

[@DoomTobi]

German unions have failed terribly to support employees of smaller sectors though. They mostly care about the big industries. We have a low unemployment rate, but at the cost of an extremely large "low wage" sector - one of the worst in western europe. Some of the people working in those are in unions but they get basically zero support from those. You are barely earning enough to meet your basic needs if you're living alone and in one of the bigger cities. One of those sectors is package delivery. In denmark a delivery driver is earning more than 2 times as much as in Germany, mostly because he has a union negotiated contract.

[@Mukation]

I'm a union rep in Sweden for engineers, at a company with 12000 employees and about 2000 at our local office. And our CFO is one of my members :P Even our head of HR is a member of a union for managers. It's litterally not a big deal here. We're all employees, even the senior managers.

[@emypena]

The best way to take advantage of Union is to become a Union Officer. It has high pay, ability to manage union dues, less actual company work, etc.

[@foobarFR]

12:24 in France, the strength of union doesn't rely on membership but on the representativeness, which is calculated on electoral scores in CSE elections. In the last complete electoral cycle (2017-2020), almost 10 millions of french private sector workers voted for unions' lists in CSE elections - that's 45% of the workforce. That's enormous. It's even bigger than the participation rate of some political elections... and a LOT of workers didn't vote simply because there is no CSE in their companies! (a CSE exists only in companies above 11 employees) At this point, some say that french unions have in fact a larger audience than political parties. One simple example: in my company, we are 200 people. We have a CSE with 10 elected representatives, from 2 different unions. I think maybe 20 employees are union members - some elected representatives aren't even members of the union of their own list! but we had more than 100 voters on the last election. So : the real union power isn't the 20-ish members, it's the 100 voters. and it's exactly how the shop stewards ("délégués syndicaux"), the two employees who has the right to sign CBAs, see it, and how the boss sees it, believe me.

[@AlexRadler-bw9js]

Interesting Video and as allways well researched. However this time I think some important facts are missing. About the state of US-Unions its the active policy of union-crushing beginning in the Reagan-Era and lasting way into the 2000s on federal level. One of the culmination points being the air-traffic-controllers strike in 1981 ending with 11.000 air-traffic-controllers being fired by the Reagan-Administration. On the state-level its right-to-work-laws especially in red states that prevent unions from bargaining in a position with at least a similar power as the employers. As for Germany the wage-moderation since the mid 2000s is in a large part not a concsious decision by the unions. It is also forced on them by the so called Agenda 2000 consisting of the laws for reformation of the labour-market better known as Hartz I to IV. Most consequential until today is the Hartz IV-law which drastically cut unemployment benefits and mandated unemployed to accept any job at any wage. Often much lower than the cost of living. By this on the one hand constituting a factual coercion into work and by this making it possible to depress wages to very, very low levels, since there was no minimum wage. On first glance this lead to the establishment of a low-vage-sector which nowerdays comprises over 20% of the entire workforce. On second glance this also lowerd mid-level wages. With every employee being afraid of sliding into the low-wage-sector unions couldn´t bargain as effective as before these laws. Hartz IV in combination with the Euro-Zone exportet unemployment to other Euro-Zone Contries who had less productive industries in the first place and couldn´t put their workforce under the same preassure as Germany did. And finally: competitiveness is a relative concept. If a country rises its competitiveness some other countries competitiveness declines relative to that of the first country. If the second country would take the same meassures as the first country both countries are the same again but on a lower level for their employees. If every country in the world does this, it only leads to a race to the bottom in which finally nobody gains anything. Ultimately not even the employers since no one will have the money to by their products.

Hi Ashton, As a citizen of an EU member state I can say that each state in the US is like a country over herem you just have the advantage of speaking English mostly everywhere. Therefore the act that govt. Newsom wrote into California law is quite similar as the French sectoral laws. I hope you will not get offended by my comment as I am an avid fan of your channel since I've discovered it recently.

[@foobarFR]

In France, sectoral bargaining is less and less powerful. Macron boosted a lot company-level bargaining in 2017. In some matters, sectoral CBAs can now be negated by company deal.

[@goodmaro]

5:16 Ever think there might be a causal relationship there: that unionization of a business discourages them from expanding in a way that requires more jobs? That unionization discourages investment?

[@nemiloszorka1162]

Fight the power! ❤

[@asmodon]

It’s crucial that unions and employers are on even footing when negotiating. In Germany the government acts as a mediator if needed. If one of the parties has higher negotiating power and abuses that power the system as a whole suffers. The US has experienced labour unions abusing their power in the 60s and derived their „unions bad“ stance from that. In the UK the unions were pretty radical in the 70s until Thatcher basically killed them off. German unions on the other hand were always attached to the Social Democrats, who are much more used to negotiating with government or being in government themselves.

[@wr6293]

Is a union for fast food workers throughout the USA really impossible? Or is it just unthinkable but possible up to the point that workers realize that if they bargain together?

[@tasker6669]

i think its impossible in my opinion, there is no politcal will to benefit workers in the republican party recognizable, the oposit is the case IN MY OPINION- and when big parts of the country vote for trump and still do - i see the oposit more likley that union could be outlawed then get more "benefits"

[@wr6293]

@@tasker6669 Education kills ignorance and make people recognize when they are being cheated

[@Boris80b]

There is nothing inherently impossible about it. It's about greed, plain and simple. It's not because "the country is big" or some other made up nonsense.

[@DisinterestedObserver]

Fast food workers can continue their push to be paid more than their unskilled labor is worth until the franchisees see adding a $100k machine that displaces a $15/hr worker is a net benefit to the franchisee’s bottom line after a couple of years. They’re not indispensable if they drive labor costs too high. After all, there is a limit to what the consumer will pay for a hamburger, fries, and soft drink.

[@Boris80b]

ah... more conservative excuses

[@larrywave]

Just to note union membership has been going down here in Finland for years now

[@franciscomagalhaes7457]

Solidarity with the brave american strikers. The world is watching.

[@larryyoungquist6876]

When Ronald Reagan fired the air traffic controllers and crushed PATCO, that was a nail in the coffin of unionization in the US. (And ironically, by the former union president of a union.) That act and numerous other steps either taken by him or in his name, have led to our current situation in many different areas.

[@miskatonic6210]

I'm early today. Hello from germany.

[@TypeAshton]

Hello there!

[@jdhenge]

In 2022, Switzerland led the ranking of countries with the highest average wealth per adult, with approximately 685,000 U.S. dollars per person. The United States was ranked second with an average wealth of around 550,000 U.S. dollars per adult

[@JohnMckeown-dl2cl]

From a personal point of view, I feel that the US might have a problem moving toward the "European way" because of the historical adversarial relationship between unions and employers. The two groups spend much of their time yelling at each other and making accusations rather than talking and trying to be partners. Hiring "goon squads" to beat and intimidate workers (steel workers) or damaging production lines (remember the Luddites?) has fostered this relationship. This history goes back at least 100 years. I admit a level of ignorance about the European labor movement, because it was not covered in my American education, but it does not seem so rife with wrongs on both sides. I will also admit to never having been in a union job. As you said there is only a 1-in-10 chance and my employment was never part of the union workforce, although some of the jobs, had they been in Europe, probably would have been. An additional factor is the level of corruption that has found its way into the US labor movement. Like some politicians, many union leaders have ended up moving from their office to a prison cell as a result of wrongdoing in office. I am not saying all union leaders are criminals, just like all politicians are not, but the record of groups like the Teamsters has not placed them in a good light. Giving the workers a seat at the table would prove enlightening to both sides. Maybe, just maybe, they could work things out better as peers rather than opponents. Also, it could not hurt to address "Wall Street" influence and executive compensation at the same time.

[@victorcapel2755]

Don't know about other countries in Europe, but the early labour movement in Sweden was not well recived by the companies and the government. In the 30s, the military was called in to protect strike breakers at a harbour and the end result was 5 people, strikers, dead and another 5 injured when the troops opened fire. After that, the labour movement and the employers felt that it had gone too far (this was just the cresendo of 2 or 3 decades of hostility between employers and employees) and a deal was struck in 1938 between the labour movement and the companies, that labour disputes were to be resolved in good faith and set up systems for that, that still (in large) holds today. It probably helped that Sweden is/was a small country and a few "titans of industry" controlled much of the economy back then, so if they said that unions and companies were to work together, that would apply to large parts of the swedish economy from the start. Another consequens of the "Ådalen shots" was that the military was not allowed to have police powers in Sweden anymore.

[@reneolthof6811]

Generally speakiing what you describe what happened in the US in the 20th century happened in Europe in the 19th century. As other comments have pointed out it basically boils down to the Rhineland model versus the Anglo-American adversorial model. You can see the same thing in the judicial sector.

[@TheRealTopGunZ]

In Greece we had during the 80's a great backlash from the case where unions and the socialist government were working together against the interests of the Greek people. The then government gave tremendous power to the public sector unions, leading three decades later to the collapse of the Greek economy, as for years it was based on the model of borrowing money to pay exorbitant salaries and pensions to public workers, especially in certain high profile public companies that had monopolies (power, telecommunications, railroads etc.) and then that money being spent in the Greek market to buy imported goods. Along with the total destruction of Greek industry, as the socialists supported strikes that led dozens of enterprises to collapse, go bankrupt, or just leave for other countries, and then they would employ those that lost their jobs in the public sector or buy out the company and make it a state owned one. In general, if someone wants to see how NOT to do unions, they should see 80's Greece. Nowadays, after many reforms, most of the unions work as they were intended, defending worker's rights, not the benefits of the few that run them. But even today we have many unions working in counterproductive ways, trying to defend certain political ideas rather than the workers themselves, but most people, thankfully have turned their backs on such organizations. Americans need to stop only caring about the rights to either kill unborn (left) or born (right) kids, or support every mentally ill ideology (from post-progressivism on the left to antivaxxers on the right) and start fighting for actual rights, like maternity leave, unlimited sick days etc. Unionizing is the only way, BUT always with caution for people that could try to hijack the efforts for their personal gains.

[@BoGy1980]

I really love how you point out that 'socialism' is actually better than capitalism, time over time.... You're really doing a great job. I live in Belgium myself, and i always look at the world from my perspective, and yeah we may be paying one of the worlds highest tax-rates, but what we get in return is so much more. The stigma socialism = communism should really be broken down, and you're doing your part in getting that message out. Danke fur das! (ENG: Thx for that!)

[@supernova19805]

Wow, I almost forgot that when I still lived and worked in Germany, the company had a union office in the building and company management and union had regular meetings. I now live in a so called right to work state and to say the least, it's the polar opposite and state politicians and governor, seem to be so proud of it. It's just sad.

[@bwest-yq3uc]

Yes, Federal and State and local elected politicians ARE proud of their ANTI-UNION stance and ability to continue preventing employees exercising their lawful right to unionize. SAD, but that is the biggest weapon companies got to fight unionization and employees rights be damned. Politicians know they are VIOLATING the law but there is no penalty for doing so, and they just continue to prevent unions from forming. They did that at the Tennessee VW unionize drive and they prevent it.

[@Sakkura1]

13:24 You don't walk in physically. It's all digital in countries that have joined this century.

[@wormer104]

I’ve lost two apartments because my workplace went on strike and my attendance served no purpose. So unions are not exactly my favorite groups.