Statistically, white collar union workers have higher compensation[1], better benefits and more time off. They also report higher rates of life satisfaction[2].

[1] https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/04/art2full.pdf

[2] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0160449X16643321

>both for the dues unceremoniously rippéd

I mean, yeah, you owe dues. How else should it work? When I was part of a union it amounted to 2 hours of wages per month, not exactly onerous.

Counterexample: the nascent Google employees union is taking 1% of total comp.

That’s pretty ambitious when the employees are Googlers.

>> itsoktocry 2 hours ago [–]

>> When I was part of a union it amounted to 2 hours of wages per month, not exactly onerous. reply

>> elefanten 2 hours ago [–]

>> Counterexample: the nascent Google employees union is taking 1% of total comp.

Not sure it's really a counterexample as there are - in theory - about 200 work hours per month, so 1% of comp is pretty much equivalent to 2 hours of wages per month.

> I mean, yeah, you owe dues. How else should it work?

It's a bigger problem in non Right to Work states, where you can be forced to join the union (and have dues taken from you).

In places where joining the union for their benefits is voluntary I don't see the problem.

There are also places where you don't have to join the union, but they still take some of the wages (at a lower rate than full members) for nebulous "benefits" the union offers. Those are especially contentious because not all the employee believe they get any benefits at all.

The US should shift to the European model where multiple unions are available at each employer, and they compete with each other for membership. I believe joining a union is required there, they don't have any non-union jobs, but a European union is not the same as a US one.

Taft-Hartley banned the "closed shop," where you must join a union to work at a business, in 1947. You will never be forced to join a union anywhere in the US to work at any given employer.

That's not true. You misunderstand the rules.

Google: "closed shop vs union shop" and you will see.

Basically you cannot have a business that only hires from a union, but you can have a business that requires you to join a union after being hired meaning the union cannot prevent you from joining them.

Or in other words in non-right-to-work states you can be forced to join a union.

Under the NLRA, you are never required to join a union. You may be required to pay union dues, and the union will still represent you in collective bargaining, but that doesn't make you a union member.

Could unions be ad-supported? Maybe you put a TV monitor playing a continuous stream of ads in the employee break room. It's win-win.

The lazy worker argument applies to any job. I work in a F500 and have 'lazy' coworkers. I can't just go to my manager and get them fired.

The difference is that with a union not even the manager can fire them if he notices that they are lazy

The union workers I know generally are pleased by their union, especially if they worked in their location prior to organization. They are able to remember and appreciate the difference between how management treated them before and after. Even my friends who worked as management in union-shops appreciated what the org was able to do for the people they supervised (even if it was frustrating during 2018 strikes to have to manage entire hotel restaurants short staffed).

Out of curiosity, what field are your union friends in, and do you happen to know what union represents them?

Mainly government jobs - I don't know the union.