Did Technology Help Kill The Union?


Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Graph: BoogaLouie/Wikimedia Commons

If you're a political animal, then you'd already know that the victory of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in beating the recall election last Tuesday was heralded as yet another death knell in the popularity of labor unions in the United States (his opponents, however, argued that he won by outspening his rival by a 7 to 1 margin).

Indeed, as the graph above showed, union membership has been declining in decades. But what caused it?

Derek Thompson of The Atlantic argues that there's an economic reason to the decline in the power of the unions: the rise of technology. He pointed out the argument of Emin M. Dinlersoz and Jeremy Greenwood in "The Rise and Fall of U.S. Unions":

In the second half of the 20th century, the information age did a few things that badly hurt unions. First, robots replaced unskilled workers in factories. Second, IT created complicated machines and programs that required something more than assembly-line competence. (Third, although this isn't prominently featured in the article, multinational companies got savvier about offshoring cheap labor that wasn't automated.) Just as Ford's innovation had disproportionately empowered unskilled workers, who are more likely to unionize, the information age had had disproportionately empowered skilled workers, who are more likely to not unionize.

Link 


And unions have become their own worst enemy. Riddled with dead wood and infiltrated by the mob, coupled with such strong arm tactics as forcing dues payment. The concept of a union is still a good idea --united we stand, divided we fall-- but so far, too many greedy humans have ruined it at every possible juncture. When more humans raise more humans to be altruistic vs raw capitalist corporate socialists (research it before jeering, you'll see), then needing a union will be an idea whose time has passed. But employers will always prey on their workers when no one is watching. And as most labor laws allow exemptions for companies with fewer than 100 employees, millions of workers have no protection of any kind.

Obama "out spent" his way to victory too.

And the band plays on....
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The article didn't distinguish the difference between labor unions in manufacturing, private service industries and public sector - all of which suffer decline in participation.

The rise of technology may have contributed to the decline in labor union in manufacturing, but that's probably not a big factor in the service industry and public sector.

Still, interesting to think about.

@WordyGrrl - that's definitely something to think about. I think you're right.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/07/no-dems-were-not-outspent-7-to-1-in-wisconsin/

Don't be so quick to believe that money was the only factor in Walker's win.

As for the decline of unions, it might just be that they have demanded so much that they have demanded their members out of jobs. Of course, the union LEADERS will always have their jobs, you know, the job of doing all the demanding.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Though the recent battles in Wisconsin are mentioned, it should be noted that Walker did not "destroy" the unions. The law was changed so that union dues were not automatically deducted from the checks of certain workers. Anyone who wants to can still join the union and pay dues. The fact that so many workers decided just to keep that money for themselves when given a choice is definitely food for thought. If unions are so great, why did so many opt out when given a choice? Also, the linked article makes no distinction between public sector unions and private sector unions. Depending on your political views, one could argue that public sector unions in general might not be the best entities for ensuring most efficient use of taxpayer funds. To be sure, the recent happenings in Wisconsin are just round one in what is sure to be a protracted and heated battle as more states with budget concerns look at their own situations to see if cost savings can be achieved by passing similar legislation...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
There's also the issue that unions are one of the major reasons that the manufacturing workplace is as mechanized as it is. One of the major efforts of unions has been to increase wages and benefits, which also increases manufacturing costs for the manufacturer. US industry has largely turned to mechanization to offset this cost increase and improve per-worker productivity.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Does the paper go into the corresponding trends in other industrialized countries? If automation were the key to union membership decline then surely it would be seen elsewhere. A quick search found http://www.samf.aau.dk/~jlind/tekster/IJES%20article%20on%20Ghent%20system.htm which says that union membership in Denmark, Sweden, and Finland peaked in the 1980s and 1990s at 80% of the labor force.

That link points out that in those countries unemployment insurance was done voluntarily, through the unions. This of course makes union membership more attractive. The paper goes on to say "This seems to indicate that unions in the three countries may be facing this additional threat on membership losses in addition to the tendencies known from other countries, such as industrial restructuring, welfare state interventions, individualisation and globalization."
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Good points! And I think an additional factor may be that unions (historically, collectively) have already won most of the rights American workers wanted: 40-hour week, pay for overtime, health and safety laws, etc. Now that we have those, what's left for unions to use to get us fired up about membership?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Loss of certain industry is killing the member count of existing unions, but the decline in overall percentage (meaning the lack of unions overall in the workplace) has something to do with the fact that very few unions do much to noticeably protect or assist their membership any more. Some of that is the unions' fault, with union leadership worried more about themselves and their egos than their members, and some of that is because the primary tool at the bargaining table on both sides is now simply labor law. The corporation keeps on eating at the union agreements until all that's left is what they can legally get away with. Yeah unions help make sure they don't cross that line, but a) they shouldn't have to, and b) one of the other benefits of the information age - public whistle-blowing, means it's not as necessary any more.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Click here to access all of this post's 9 comments




Email This Post to a Friend
"Did Technology Help Kill The Union?"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More