Originally Posted by toast64

IMO, unions served a very important role in the early 20th centuries. Many of the people running corporations back then were greedy, ruthless and heartless - and yes they would put most of today's CEOs to shame in those categories. Unions organizers fought, and some died, to secure a decent wage, reasonable work hours and decent conditions.

In the "glory years" of the 50's, 60's and early 70's, unions were able to secure a way of life that really lifted the middle class in America. If it were not for unions, again imo, we would not be the country we are today.

But having said that, globalization has rendered the unions almost powerless. If a company wants to break the union, they don't need to deal with it. Just move the plant to the pacific rim, or source from there.

Times have changed. When unions say that they are trying to save good US jobs, I think their argument rings hollow. When they want to negotiate for more money and more benefits, etc., they hasten the move to other countries.

So, if unions REALLY want to save US jobs, there is only one choice; they need to bring the standard of living in other countries to a similar level as ours, so the wage/benefit cost differential goes away. If they want to save US jobs, they should be working in developing nations to organize there. THAT, unfortunately, would be a much bigger fight than their union forefathers had to fight. It also would mean that other countries might become as gluttonous as US, which would be really unfortunate.

Okay, "shields up, Scotty!"