Comment on ‘Power in the hands of people’: union leaders push to revive ailing US labor movement
anon6789@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I feel very conflicted about unions every time they come up, because it seems they should be dead-simply beneficial to workers. To me, that is the sole reason for their existence. But when I talk to people in unions in person and when I hear so many interviews, it doesn’t seem to be so.
With the end of the recent JBS strike, I’ve seen a number of outlets talk about how the union itself brought in scabs. The deal they struck doesn’t sound any better than the one they had that led to them striking.
How do unions end up so conflicted? Doesn’t their funding come from membership? I’ve never had a union job, and being in a place where you can get fired for any reason, such as organizing, it seems to make it a very risk thing with a less than certain payoff. Can anyone with better insight share their experience?
Schmoo@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
That’s because the labor movement in the US has been systematically suppressed for decades. Most surviving unions are what could be called “business unions” or class-collaborationist unions. They are corrupt and have leadership that cut deals with the employers, and union elections are intentionally manipulated to depress turnout, usually by keeping the rank and file in the dark about the schedule.