Business failures not caused by unions
In short, the biggest fear voiced by employer groups regarding unionization— that it will inevitably drive them out of business—has no evidentiary basis.So if a unionized workplace has no bearing on whether a firm survives or not, why do Big Business and its corporate lackeys in the Republican party constantly lie about it? Because without unions, workers could be treated like a commodity, exploited to work long hours with little pay or benefits. Keep the overhead down, and the bottom line is padded, or so the thinking of the union-busters goes. More corporate profits equals more happy shareholders who are willing to allow even greater bonuses for the executives who brought them those profits. It's reminiscent of Gordon Gecko. Greed is good in their world.
[...]
Figure C confirms the central conclusion of this brief—there is no “jump” and the right of workers to bargain collectively has no causal effect on firm survival. Firms just to the right of 50% vote share have failure rates that are almost identical to firms just to the left. This means, therefore, that firms that become unionized are no more likely to fail than firms that remain nonunion.
Don't expect that just because the facts show that unions aren't the cause of failed businesses that the union-busters will pack up and go home. Besides since when did the facts matter to them?
Comments:
This makes a lot of sense, thank you for the info!
Post a Comment