I am in a union and I've consulted for a union. I'm pro-union. Two of my brothers are union. I think unions are essential for a healthy working class. That's why I wish they operated more intelligently. I want to share a few observations of mine - mostly anecdotal - because I think it is okay to be pro-union and critical at the same time. These aren't the observations of a union expert, and they probably aren't the central problems. Most of my comments come from the standpoint of someone considering public perception and public favor of unions. Hopefully this could spur a worthwhile discussion.
First, public sector unions are suffering because their private sector brothers and sisters have experienced the "giant sucking sound" about which Ross Perot warned. Without private sector unions possessing any leverage to move working class incomes upward, it is just a matter of time before private sector unions turn and look enviously at their public sector brothers sisters. Even if public servants begin to request/bargain smaller raises, working class incomes have stagnated in the US since the early 1970s. Combine the potential for envy with the FOX propaganda noise machine, and you have our present moment.
FOX, WSJ, and the talk radio syndicate have done a BRILLIANT job of distracting everyone from the fact that GDP continues to grow while working class incomes stagnate or shrink. This is precisely what was predicted to happen post-NAFTA. NAFTA gutted the private sector unions and increased margins for manufacturing and services as the manufacturing end was exported to cheaper lands. In short, wealth is being transferred from the poor and working classes to the rich. Unless this wealth is taxed, we can only expect infrastructure and services to deteriorate.
That brings me to my second problem. The people I know who are most enthusiastic about them either draw their salary directly from the union or they studied the Progressive Era. Workaday folk - particularly private sector ones - are not fond of unions, even those people who belong to them. I must note that I'm most familiar with the trades (e.g., carpentry, plumbing, truck driving).
One of my brothers, a former truck driver, was fucked by his union. He switched from a non-union firm to a union firm. One union firm bid to buy his union firm. His union guaranteed that the seniority drivers list would be blended with that of the buying firm. After the sale went through, the old firm's union simply folded. All of the older drivers were assumed as new labor in the lists. My brother was without a job and told it would take nearly 8 years to get inside a truck again. He now is a free-lance scale repairman, avid Limbaugh listener, and rabid hater of unions.
My carpenter brother is much more reasonable. He would tell anyone that the value of unions to the country far outweighs any harm. Yet, he firmly believes that ownership would be nuts, absa-fuckin-lutely nuts to contract with union labor. Why? Because of the cost. With some sorts of jobs, if you hire union, everyone has to be union. So, you end up hiring union painters. In DuPage County in Illinois union painters get northward of $40.00/hour. Come on! Qualitatively, you could spend 60% less and just have a guy who can't cut a line as well and may not be trained with lead paint. And in the present market, you are likely to find former union people with equivalent skills willing to undersell their union counterparts.
He's also told me about problems with the union halls. A guy becomes a union plumber. Today, he could sit on his ass at a union hall until he's 40 years old waiting to get work. Why? Because old-ass dudes who are friends with the union bosses get the plumb jobs. Some give kick-backs to the bosses in order to get work. Meanwhile an entire cohort of new unions guys are going broke, sitting on their asses, and becoming disaffected with unions.
A good friend of mine who consults with unions in Chicago tells me that various unions are nepotistic. Frankly, I don't care about that on its face. The harm, he explains, is that the leadership follows the same old 1970s leadership model. They are all goon-like bullies. They don't sell what the unions have to offer. Instead, they try to strong arm. And, in the present governing environment in city councils throughout the Chicagoland area, people aren't too fond of being strong armed. Moreover, there IS a very real opportunity for union labor to be pitched.
To conclude, we are at a liminal moment for which we aren't prepared. For every once of effort we put into upsetting this fucking immoral legislation in Wisconsin and in other states, we should INSIST on unions changing and becoming better - becoming advocates of the best that trained, skilled labor has to offer to improve the quality of life of people throughout the country, while providing a model for the improvement of lives throughout the world. If Walker manages to lose, and collective bargaining is saved in Wisconsin, unless unions change, become relevant again, and vigilantly manage their perceptions in a world filled with Koch-suckers who will endlessly fight to destroy them.
In the meantime, we need to tax the NAFTA-divident (that's my phrase, by the way :) Tax the rich. Reap our share from the public decision we made to undermine organized labor - anything else is choosing voluntarily to hand our wealth over to the rich.