Labor Day Tribute: Why Unions Suck

In the 1930’s, when workers in San Antonio forced by the Depression into degrading pay and conditions organized to improve their plight, they set in motion a series of unintended consequences.  Their labor union, organized by authentic Communists, aimed to create a protected proletariat.  Their efforts were undermined by New Deal bureaucrats, who blew up the whole program with a simple innovation – a national minimum wage.

Employers, legally barred from maintaining degrading and abusive conditions, replaced most of the workers with machines.  Over the following decade, the number of workers dropped dramatically, while wages more than tripled, working conditions improved, and the industry evolved.

This was a fantastic outcome for everyone.  Yes, everyone.  The difficulty we have in understanding that fact helps explain why politicians still struggle to make sound economic policy.

If we measure prosperity solely in terms of income, then we miss the bulk of what modern American capitalism has done for humanity.  Wages over the long-term have generally increased, but that’s not the miracle.  The miracle is what capitalism has done for the purchasing power of ordinary people or the cost of goods in terms of the number hours worked to earn them.

How much did it cost to send a 300-word message to Grandma in 1930?  What about in 1990?  How much has that cost dropped in just the past twenty years?  That same phenomenon has slashed the cost of practically everything, so that even the poorest Americans typically own refrigerators, smart phones, cars, and so on.  Even the cost of gasoline in real terms has been relatively flat over the past seven decades.

The only thing that consistently costs more now than it did twenty years ago is skilled human labor.  The cost of services that depend on direct interaction with a physically present human expert – like health care and education – have skyrocketed.  The greatest beneficiaries of modern capitalism globally have been educated, hard-working people.

The failure of efforts like the Pecan Workers’ Strike and success of the effort to build a Federal safety net moved America up the economic value chain.  Outlawing the worst abuses and protecting people against penury allowed the country to continue its long, spiraling, economic journey upward.  It created demand for workers in new types of jobs; jobs that demanded engineering and creative skills that were poorly rewarded before.

Those jobs also weakened the value of unions since individual workers could compete for value on their own merits and share more of the rewards.  This move meant that labor, freed from union constraints, became almost like capital – portable, marketable, even improvable.

What lessons does the failed Pecan Workers’ Strike offer for politics?

FirstIt’s usually wrong for the government to do nothing, but it’s almost always best to do as little as necessary.  The Feds could have jumped into the Pecan Workers’ Strike headfirst and tried to dictate every aspect of working conditions in that industry.  That happened in some other situations.  Employers in such a case would have needed some industry protections, which they would have gotten.  That industry would have continued with higher prices to consumers, subsidies to the businesses, and a halted progress toward mechanization and innovation.

You can see the results of these kinds of mistakes in states and industries that mandate union membership, issue tough job security protections, and stifle change in the name of worker protection.  Lighter regulation is better than heavy and it’s also sometimes better than nothing.

Second – The Feds could have done nothing at all, the KKK could have succeeded in their efforts to break the strike, and nothing would have changed.  A complete absence of regulation would have halted the move up the value chain just as easily as forced unionization.

With no safety net and little to curb abuses, capitalism eats itself.  The economy starts to move up the value chain, but the disruptions inevitably created by that shift drive people out of their careers.  With nothing but luck to stop them from dropping into sucking poverty, more and more of them become functionally unavailable either for education, the workforce, capital development, or consumption.  Instead of adapting, they are ruined.

The gaping maw of unmitigated poverty gradually swallows an increasing share of the population, until even the wealthy see the value of their capital erode.  Growing poverty eventually makes automation pointless as the pool of desperate people available for the most demeaning labor grows.  The brief flowering brought on by the lack of rules shrivels away.  Those who were lucky enough to have parents or grandparents who benefited from the temporary boom live in a brittle shell of wealth behind high walls while the banana republic around them withers.

Doing nothing at all to regulate the economy and develop infrastructure is a bad idea.

Third – Unions suck.  Government was always more effective at improving labor conditions than unions.  Collective bargaining created a whole new infrastructure to feed on individuals and siphon away their resources.  Like any other organization, the union’s primary goal very quickly becomes self-promotion.

The value of unions has passed but the organization lingers like a persistent rash continuing to stifle innovation and suck energy from the economy.  Unions solved their last problem more than half a century ago.  In our time they are a horrid relic that promotes mediocrity and corruption.

For those who want simple answers, regardless whether they live on the left or the right, the world is a frustrating place.  Marxists aren’t the only enemies of capitalism.  Simple answers are just as dangerous.

Happy Labor Day.

Advertisements

About Chris Ladd

Chris Ladd is a Texan living in the Chicago area. He has been involved in grassroots Republican politics for most of his life. He was a Republican precinct committeeman in suburban Chicago until he resigned from the party and his position after the 2016 Republican Convention. He can be reached at gopliferchicago at gmail dot com.
This entry was posted in Business, Finance and Economics, Policy, Politics, Socialism, Taxes and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Labor Day Tribute: Why Unions Suck

  1. james kelly says:

    Are you kidding? You obviously know nothing about what the poorest Americans own. Refrigerators, yes. However cars and smart phones, Ha! Hardly typical! I deal with these folks daily. What cars they have, you would be afraid to drive.

    Also, it can reasonably be argued that wages for physical labor, skilled or otherwise, union or not, have remained flat or fallen.

    Finally, Unions in times past, were considered, by government, to be the perfect tool to put wealth on the street where it allowed small business to prosper. Imagine the small family businesses on your local main street each having to hire three or four persons to help out, thanks to additional business from the folks making good wages. For the past thirty years, these small businesses have been decimated as union shops have closed. Example: I make twelve dollars an hour, I drive an old car with minimum insurance. If my car gets dented, I’ll chose to live with it rather than repair it. That’s less work for the body shop and the owner no longer needs to keep hired help. At twenty-five dollars an hour, I not only have a better car with full insurance, but also a Sunday driver, a motorcycle, and a boat. All bought at and serviced by local business. The difference is huge.

  2. Scott Erb says:

    I do not claim causality here, but unions were stronger before 1980, and since then they have become exceedingly weak in the US (though remain strong in economically successful states like Germany). And look at this graphic:
    http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/09/04/opinion/04reich-graphic.html?ref=sunday

    Since 1979 the workers have gotten very little. Part of it is politics — Clinton and Obama are to the right of Nixon, Ford and Eisenhower in terms of being more free market. Nixon, Ford and Eisenhower would hardly be welcomed in tea party circles. The country embraced a perspective that benefited the wealthiest. Unions probably had a role in protecting workers’ share of the economic growth though — and arguably still play a positive role in successful European economies. And they play a destructive role in unsuccessful economies like Greece. So…it’s complicated…

  3. Tomeb says:

    Unions create wealth…. Meaning CEO got to share and keeps non union in line with rates people can afford to work for. The right to work states, always have come in, the bottom of barrel for health, education and wealth.. do the math.

  4. Ryan Anne says:

    I need a candidate 1. Is accountable – don’t care if you drank to much, smoked grass, was dishonest in high school/college- pre- 25ish, etc… (Killing someone need not apply) Has an idea that will fix MY state or at least my region (New England) 2. Can show proof of their idea’s…actual proof. 3. Is for competition -…it’s a good thing 4. Agrees that whining will get you nowhere, you want change, get out there and spread the word, be a leader and do it yourself!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s