Why Haven't Unions Adjusted Well to the New Economy ?

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

It seems like unions have fared poorly in recent years across much of the world being increasingly confined to legacy occupations such as civil services or large conglomerates who were already unionised. The new gig economy should be a boom to unionization because they provide the same kind of undifferenated mass work that the unions of yester did but they have been remarkaly unscuceful. Much of that comes down to legal obstacles such as being classifed in contractors but even in jurdistctions where such practices are outlawed unions have been remarkably anemic globaly.

Why is that ?

[parochial boy]

This is a tendency that started before the emergence of gig economy jobs, and union membership has been declining for a while that. A large part is the increasing social atomisation of recent decades, with people being less likely to join organisations of any sort. All the more so with people changing jobs reguarly, fewer long term connections to colleagues and all the rest; but also exacerbated by legislation that has tended to weaken unions over all - making it simply less worthwhile to join one as the benefits aren't as high relative to the costs.

With the gig economy itself -a pretty big part of this is the question of socialisation. As in, back in the days of the industrial working class, people would work in the same jobs with the same people for years and years and this would create a sense of solidarity and comradeship of which union membership was a part. Nowadays and uber driver or delivery driver is mostly working alone, so clearly doesn't build those relationships, even more so when they tend to regularly move from one job to another - and without that sense of solidarity and mutual responsibility, less inclination to join a union.

Then the unions themselves are also oriented towards working industrial employees in terms of what they offer, the demands they make and so on. The situation of new service workers are somewhat different, so the offer needs to be somewhat different. All the more so given the precarity of these workers. An employee (usually) has certain protections against being fired or loss of income. With deliveroo, if a courier is being a bit uppity, well suddenly they get fewer jobs, and because they are self employed there's not a lot they can do. So little incentive to join a union, a lot of incentive to keep your head down and not lose work to the other couriers you are in competition with

[Samof94]

It seems like unions have fared poorly in recent years across much of the world being increasingly confined to legacy occupations such as civil services or large conglomerates who were already unionised. The new gig economy should be a boom to unionization because they provide the same kind of undifferenated mass work that the unions of yester did but they have been remarkaly unscuceful. Much of that comes down to legal obstacles such as being classifed in contractors but even in jurdistctions where such practices are outlawed unions have been remarkably anemic globaly.

Why is that ?

Unions have been long vilified by center left parties moving right 30-40 years ago.

[dead0man]

what could a union do for a gig worker other than take a percentage of their money?  They're not ever going to get benies, sick days/vacation are a non issue by definition, as are the number of hours worked.

"gig economy" companies have to pay reasonable rates or nobody will do the job, this will always be true.

Unions have been long vilified by center left parties moving right 30-40 years ago.

Have they done anything in the last 30-40 years that needed praising?

[PSOL]

Legal barriers and a hostile environment to unions.

[Indy Texas]

The shift to white collar/service jobs obviously ate away at their pool of members and potential members, which in turn begs another question:

Why did the US labor movement never seem to make any serious attempt to unionize office/clerical workers in the late 19th/early 20th century when they were organizing other segments of the working population? Why was there no "bank tellers union" or "life insurance salesmen union"?

In some countries, even professions like doctors and lawyers have unions and go on strike in certain situations.

[Samof94]

The shift to white collar/service jobs obviously ate away at their pool of members and potential members, which in turn begs another question:

Why did the US labor movement never seem to make any serious attempt to unionize office/clerical workers in the late 19th/early 20th century when they were organizing other segments of the working population? Why was there no "bank tellers union" or "life insurance salesmen union"?

In some countries, even professions like doctors and lawyers have unions and go on strike in certain situations.

India is notorious for striking lawyers.

[Mr. Smith]

Because The New Economy is far too atomized and isolated for unions.

[dw93]

It also doesn't help that Reagan significantly weakened them in the 1980s.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Because the gig economy is hard if you have to pay union dues, have a union control how your work, etc.

[If my soul was made of stone]

Because the gig economy is hard if you have to pay union dues, have a union control how your work, etc.

"I can't afford health insurance, but it's better than paying MUH DUES" –every Uber driver ever, apparently

[Former President tack50]

Because the gig economy is hard if you have to pay union dues, have a union control how your work, etc.

I don't exactly know how much union dues are in the US; but I can say that here the biggest labour union (CCOO) charges 14.5€ a month in union fees. The 2nd largest union (UGT) charges 13€ a month, but with low income workers (defined as up to 1.5 times minimum wage) paying only 9.5€ a month.

Those are not exactly some outrageously expensive numbers? Are US union dues into the hundreds of dollars?

[Xing]

Union dues depend on the job. In my job they're about $100 a month, which is still less than healthcare costs, and considering my position either would've been reduced or cut entirely without the existence of my union, it's absolutely something I'm willing to pay.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Because the gig economy is hard if you have to pay union dues, have a union control how your work, etc.

"I can't afford health insurance, but it's better than paying MUH DUES" –every Uber driver ever, apparently

1. Oftentimes people don't take into account the long term cost/benefits with each job.
2. Depends on the union. Some unions have exclusive pool plans that were grandfathered in under Obamacare, meaning that there's no maximum cap on out-of-pocket costs (so a $1,000,000 hospital stay (reasonable for a car crash, for instance, can't believe I actually had to say those words) could cost $100,000 instead of hitting a cap of, say, $8,000). Our health care system is sh**t, so no solution would work that well.

But the biggest thing: It isn't a full time guaranteed (i.e. 9-5) job, meaning that if a union says they'll go on strike there won't really be many issues compared to, say, a steel plant.