Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 94 posts

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#41

Post by quickthrowman »

endisneigh wrote: post #33

This is a poorly done study. Doesn’t even control for profession. Take union electricians vs. fast food workers. Union electricians will make much more, like the article it saying. So what? What’s the conclusion here as it relates to unions?

I’m not sure what the study says, but I can tell you that union electricians make more money than non-union electricians. This goes for all skilled construction trades: union plumbers, fitters (both pipe and sprinkler), and tinners all make more than their non-union counterparts.

Prevailing wage requirements are mandated in government funded construction contracts specifically because non-union labor is paid less and the government is willing to pay living wages for their projects by forcing non-union contractors to pay the union wage + fringes.

FWIW I manage union electricians at a NECA member shop that hires union labor from IBEW locals and only subcontracts labor to union subcontractors.

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#42

Post by nickburns »

constantcrying wrote: post #37
bluefirebrand wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone would have to be incredibly full of themselves to think they have more bargaining power than an entire union would. Unless you are literally one of a kind, there's always someone out there who could replace you. Replacing all of the workers that an entire union represents is a way more difficult proposition

The overall bargaining power is greater, sure. But the relative power isn't. They can always just leave and work somewhere else, a union literally does not have that option. As an individual it is far easier to negotiate of you have an in demand skill. Which is obvious if you look at the study in the OP. College educated people benefit far less from unionization, they can negotiate for their own.

spoken like a fairly recent grad. an ambitious young person's perspective.

you will eventually learn that you are beyond expendable in this world, despite how 'skilled' or adept at 'negotiating' you believe yourself to be (or actually are for that matter). we all are. what you fail to see yet is that you are not more skilled nor more adept than 'The Man.' and you're characterizing yourself as being anything 'more' than non-'college educated people' is simply successful divide-and-conquer—a power struggle strategy immemorial.

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#43

Post by dantheman »

jollofricepeas wrote: post #5

This is basic economics. The rise of income and wealth inequality is directly tied to the weakening of collective bargaining, corporate consolidation and globalization. Source: https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/labor-unions... . Unionized workers are the only real backstop against corporate interests.

The majority of unionized workers in the united states are government employees. The union protects the incompetent, shields them from responsibilities, and argues against the public interest. Public sector unions are corruption and a plot against the citizenry.

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#44

Post by dantheman »

quickthrowman wrote: post #41
endisneigh wrote: post #33

This is a poorly done study. Doesn’t even control for profession. Take union electricians vs. fast food workers. Union electricians will make much more, like the article it saying. So what? What’s the conclusion here as it relates to unions?

I’m not sure what the study says, but I can tell you that union electricians make more money than non-union electricians. This goes for all skilled construction trades: union plumbers, fitters (both pipe and sprinkler), and tinners all make more than their non-union counterparts. Prevailing wage requirements are mandated in government funded construction contracts specifically because non-union labor is paid less and…

Of course the government is willing to pay, it's a grift. The union is shaking down the taxpayer, the politicians are buying union votes with the taxpayer's money.

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#45

Post by magnetowasright »

dantheman wrote: post #43
jollofricepeas wrote: post #5

This is basic economics. The rise of income and wealth inequality is directly tied to the weakening of collective bargaining, corporate consolidation and globalization. Source: https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/labor-unions... . Unionized workers are the only real backstop against corporate interests.

The majority of unionized workers in the united states are government employees. The union protects the incompetent, shields them from responsibilities, and argues against the public interest. Public sector unions are corruption and a plot against the citizenry.

Being that powerful, think of what unions could do for everyone else! Hell yeah!

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#46

Post by endisneigh »

quickthrowman wrote: post #41
endisneigh wrote: post #33

This is a poorly done study. Doesn’t even control for profession. Take union electricians vs. fast food workers. Union electricians will make much more, like the article it saying. So what? What’s the conclusion here as it relates to unions?

I’m not sure what the study says, but I can tell you that union electricians make more money than non-union electricians. This goes for all skilled construction trades: union plumbers, fitters (both pipe and sprinkler), and tinners all make more than their non-union counterparts. Prevailing wage requirements are mandated in government funded construction contracts specifically because non-union labor is paid less and…

I believe this to be the case too, but what conclusion can be made?

It’s like saying OpenAI researchers make more than university AI researchers. OK, but the rates of employment and ability to attain such positions are different.

One shouldn’t use that fact to say unequivocally industry is better than academia.

I know some folks in the trades, both union and non-union - getting a union job is difficult.

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#47

Post by xhkkffbf »

constantcrying wrote: post #22

It is worth it to look at the actual report. Sadly it makes no attempt to actually compare equivalent works, it just has two categories. Obviously union membership differs greatly between job types. The report shows that people who benefit from unions are those of low education levels, there the leveling effect of unions makes the biggest relative and absolute difference. For college educated people the benefits are…

It should also include the households where the people worked in union shops that went out of business. Tesla, a non-union shop, makes the best selling car now. The union places in Detroit can't sell electric vehicles period.

Or consider the "wealth" of the people in Hollywood who are pretty much out of work because most of the production has stopped during the various strikes. Their savings are evaporating because one union after another wants to strike.

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#48

Post by bluefirebrand »

constantcrying wrote: post #37
bluefirebrand wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone would have to be incredibly full of themselves to think they have more bargaining power than an entire union would. Unless you are literally one of a kind, there's always someone out there who could replace you. Replacing all of the workers that an entire union represents is a way more difficult proposition

The overall bargaining power is greater, sure. But the relative power isn't. They can always just leave and work somewhere else, a union literally does not have that option. As an individual it is far easier to negotiate of you have an in demand skill. Which is obvious if you look at the study in the OP. College educated people benefit far less from unionization, they can negotiate for their own.

> College educated people benefit far less from unionization

They benefit far less but they still do benefit on the whole

So... Not seeing the advantage for not unionizing, unless you think you're one of the top top top performers who might potentially be capped by a union instead of one of the mass of people who would be lifted up by it

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#49

Post by avvvv »

willcipriano wrote: post #36
constantcrying wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also known as inflation.

No. Independent from that. Jobs that require more skill or jobs that are more difficult have to offer more to get people to work for them. Raise the bar at the bottom and all wages will go up, otherwise workers will "demote" themselves. This is a distinct effect from prices raising and workers asking higher wages to counteract inflation (if they could do that why aren't they?).

Then everyone gets to benefit, no? All developing nations have far lower wages than the west, but that's often offset by lower living costs. But try to buy something out of the international market and you'll quickly feel envy. If there is an issue with higher wages then I don't see it

Re: Union households tend to have $100k more in wealth than nonunion families

#50

Post by bluefirebrand »

nickburns wrote: post #42
constantcrying wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The overall bargaining power is greater, sure. But the relative power isn't. They can always just leave and work somewhere else, a union literally does not have that option. As an individual it is far easier to negotiate of you have an in demand skill. Which is obvious if you look at the study in the OP. College educated people benefit far less from unionization, they can negotiate for their own.

spoken like a fairly recent grad. an ambitious young person's perspective. you will eventually learn that you are beyond expendable in this world, despite how 'skilled' or adept at 'negotiating' you believe yourself to be (or actually are for that matter). we all are. what you fail to see yet is that you are not more skilled nor more adept than 'The Man.' and you're characterizing yourself as being anything 'more' th…

What people fail to realize is that the leadership systems of Corporations: Boards of Directors, Executives, Management and HR are all effectively organized against them, to make sure the business gets what it wants as much as possible

When you ask your manager for a raise, they might be your biggest fan and want you to get that raise, but there is a whole system that is going to resist it, because paying you less is better for the company. You're not bargaining with a person you're bargaining with a system. And the system is built in such a way that it is incredibly difficult to persuade at an individual level

Workers can benefit from having their own system inside of the larger corporate system that is working for them, instead of this every man for themselves stuff

Post reply on HN