Earlier quoted context omitted.
The responses you got are borderline religious. Pro union people need to acknowledge and be up front about the cons of a union. It’s just another entity with power over a group of people and suffers from the same pros and cons. It’s not a panacea. Deriding legitimate concerns is not how you convince people, and makes it look like you have an agenda.
Convincing staunch anti union folks that a union would help them is like trying to convince a Southern Baptist god doesn't exist. You don't bother, you organize folks who recognize the benefit and understand the tradeoffs, people who don't think of them as individual exceptionalists. Wanting better pay and benefits for workers is an agenda, and if making that clear isn't enough (even after accounting for a cons of co…
Why is that an acceptable strategy for your side but not the other side? Could it be that you might both have valid viewpoints?