Posts tagged union membership
Opinion: Government Unions Are Hemorrhaging Members. Here’s Why.
February 4, 2025 // The numbers tell a stark story. While overall union membership sits at 9.9%, Big Labor still maintains a stranglehold over public employees, 32.2% of whom are union members. Of the 14.3 million union members nationwide, half work in government jobs, with teachers unions alone accounting for nearly one-quarter of all union members.
Civil Service Commission considers one-time authorization requirement for dues deductions
February 4, 2025 // A change would mean “using the power of government to reduce the rights of employees and give more funding to unions,” Bolger said in a phone interview with Michigan Capitol Confidential. “That’s backward. Employees should be empowered. Individual rights should be elevated. And we shouldn’t be using the power of government to favor big special interests, which is what this proposal would do.”
More membership losses for National Education Association
January 13, 2025 // The National Education Association is still shedding members, according to the latest edition of a report it filed with the federal government. The national labor union that represents teachers and school staffers saw its membership drop from 2,451,693 to 2,439,963 in the past year, for a loss of 11,730 members. Each year, the union and its affiliates must file an LM-2 report with the U.S. Department of Labor.
MICHIGAN: Unions licensed to deceive (editorial)
December 28, 2024 // With the enactment of Senate bills 790 and 791 in October, Michigan homecare providers are classified as public employees. Those are individuals — many of whom care for elderly or disabled family members — who receive a stipend from government programs for their work and sacrifice. The state law sets up homecare workers to be pressured into union membership and made to pay dues to the Service Employees International Union. Those caregivers get no benefit from union membership, because the amount of the stipend is decided legislatively and is not subject to collective bargaining. Providers need every cent available to them as they minister care.
Commentary: Did Labor Unions Bring Us the Weekend?
September 24, 2024 // I wrote my doctoral dissertation on the shortening of the American workweek. Still, I’m not the only one who has noticed this. I surveyed economic historians and asked whether they agreed with the proposition that “the reduction in the length of the workweek in American manufacturing before the Great Depression was primarily due to the efforts of labor unions.” Only 5 percent agreed, and an additional 25 percent agreed but with conditions, while the vast majority — over 70 percent — disagreed. Another question asked whether the reduction in the workweek was “primarily due to economic growth and the increased wages it brought.” The profession answered with a resounding “yes,” with less than 20 percent disagreeing.
The Union Members Who Never Voted for Their Union
September 10, 2024 // Reform federal labor law to require a secret-ballot election for unionization, as the Employee Rights Act would do. A 2022 survey showed that 70 percent of Americans — and 76 percent of union households — support this concept. At present, unions can succeed without support from a majority of its workforce when only a tiny portion of eligible employees vote in the election. For example, the NLRB is considering certifying an election in California in which just three employees out of 24 voted to unionize. A fourth voted against the union, and the rest did not vote. Federal labor law should require a quorum — such as two-thirds of all eligible voters — in order for an election result to be upheld. Such a requirement is popular: Eighty-four percent of Americans support this idea.
How the Mafia Infiltrated American Labor Unions
August 12, 2024 // While law enforcement agencies continue to monitor Mafia infiltration of labor unions, labor racketeering has become less prevalent than it was decades ago. In part, that’s because union membership plummeted after the McClellan Committee exposed the extent of labor racketeering. At its zenith in the mid-1950s, union membership comprised one-third of the labor force, but now union members only represent approximately 10 percent of American workers.
The Cases Against Sectoral Bargaining: The Practical Case
August 11, 2024 // The effect of sectoral bargaining on union corruption would be unclear. Scholars of union corruption have blamed enterprise bargaining combined with union monopoly representation for America’s unusually high levels of labor racketeering. There is truth to this, but it is also not the case that American unions involved in industries with more-sectoral-style approaches are “cleaner.” The New York City garment industry, which was exempted from various Taft-Hartley regulations on union conduct, was believed by the federal government to have been Mob influenced as recently as the 1990s. More recently, the United Auto Workers, which conducts a sort of pseudo-sectoral bargaining with the unionized Detroit Three automakers by “patterning” its contracts, was forced into a regime change after the largest union corruption scandal of the 21st century. Putting more power in the hands of America’s long-standing class of union officials, who are known for having their hands in the cookie jar, certainly is not an obvious approach to reducing or surveilling corruption in organized labor.
WMKT Special Edition Interviews Vinnie Vernuccio: RNC Labor Speech
July 30, 2024 // Vinnie Vernuccio, President and Co-founder of the Institute for the American Worker joins the show to discuss the fallout from Teamsters Union President Sean O'Brien's speech at the RNC convention.
Op-Ed: Union membership is now political. So can the government still require people to associate with a union?
July 10, 2024 // Since then, employees have argued that exclusive union representation does violate the First Amendment. Exclusivity saddles them with the “services” of nakedly political bargaining agents. Lower courts have turned those arguments aside mostly because of an older case, Minnesota Board for Community Colleges v. Knight, which suggested that exclusive representation was okay in the public sector. Knight seemed to say that when the government bargains about working conditions, it can choose its own bargaining partner. And if it chooses one exclusive union to bargain with, that choice burdens no one’s associational rights. But whether or not that’s what Knight meant, the decision has no bearing on private-sector bargaining. In the private sector, the government does not choose its own bargaining partner; it imposes one on private parties. And some of those parties object to their unions’ political views—views that are increasingly central to unionization itself. So private-sector bargaining raises a different question: can the government force private citizens to associate with a union when that union’s core purpose is increasingly political? (Elsewhere, I have argued at greater length that it cannot.)