You're right about that, but I want to support the original commenter a bit and point out that management isn't going away, and adding unions on top of that is not an improvement if they share the same flaws.

This seems like the equivalent of saying "prosecutors aren't going away, and adding defence attorneys on top of that is not an improvement if they share the same flaws".

Lawyers are famously hated around the world. But it's almost universally better to fight one if you have one on your side. Same with unions and companies. Having worked in two companies in the last few years in the same market, in the same area, one union and one not... The difference is night and day in favor of the unionized shop.

You have a point. Then unions’ raison d’être is to counterbalance management, so them ending up using the same tools and having the same flaws would still be OK to me if they provide an opportunity to get what you wouldn’t have gotten otherwise.

In a working market, pitching companies one against the others could have the same effect as unions, but I think there is enough implicit and explicit collusion and perverse incentives that we are far from that ideal.

If your boss sucks you can't fire them, but if the union sucks you CAN vote out the officers.

This is the kicker with every one of these discussions, really.

The ceiling on bad behavior is set by management, because they can do all of those bad things people claim unions do, and more - right now. The union gives you recourse