When should workers unionize, and when not?

[Rascolnikova]

This would go in theory, but it seems like this is an important question for anyone actively trying to unionize their workplace to consider, and know the different viewpoints on.

Anyone?

[Anaximander]

There are some businesses, that in order to maintain large(r) profits deliberately practice exploitation of their employees. There are smaller, regularly identified as "Mom & Pop", businesses that have no intention of exploiting their employees, although of course that is what it comes down to in a wage system.

I am going to approach it from a subjective, empirically based perspective. Some may accuse me of solipsism, but I never made any claims that I am not, indeed, living in my own mind.

I believe that in the first instance mentioned the worker, if he is conscious of his position as merely a cog in a wheel, or the host of a parasitic boss, has an ethical duty to organize, or attempt to organize, himself and his co-workers. Notice I use the word organize, not unionize--especially for the "service industry", the main provider of jobs in my area, unions serve the worker little, and serve the bosses a lot. Also, independent, non-hierarchical, and autonomous forms of organization at the workplace are less visible. As before, attempts to organize in the service industry is risky business; you may risk your job for not co-operating with the "boss approved" union, or if your place of employment has no union at all, you may be fired for the attempt itself.

At the other end of the spectrum, I have been employed at a "Mom & Pop" place myself. Other than the owner, there were only two to three other employees working at the same time. He paid well, and didn't "mean" to harm, although in principle, as I said, wages inevitably equal exploitation. That said, I don't see a need for the ten or so employees of this place (a deli) to join a union. If they organized, it could possibly (though unlikely) be run as a co-operative. The owner is a nice man, who has helped a lot of people in who he employs. Organization and co-operation? Yes. Unionize and subject this business to a set of bureaucratic interferences that hardly benefit the workers? No.

Just a disclaimer: As I said, this is based off of my experience. The respect I have for this one owner I do not extend to the employing class as a whole.

[hefty_lefty]

Well put Anaximander, I'd have to agree.
In the trades, which are heavily unionized, there is alot of corruption.

Unions are created to increase wages, and from those increased wages offer benefits and pension as well as protecting the workers from the discriminations of the employer. In return they supposedly offer the companies competent and accountable workers.

In the construction industry, being run by the italian mob, the unions and companies work together to monopolize the market. Forcing non-union shops out of business, and coercing the builders to accept only union employees on their jobs.

So, now the builders are paying more to construct buidings (increasing house,condo prices), the companies are still making good money, and the unions are profiting heavily from all of this.
The workers make a decent wage, and are somewhat secure in their jobs but the oppresion is still evident through the lack of upholding union rules, like double time, or paid parking for example.

Our unions are helping large companies get rich, not the workers, and it is just another example of people exploting the wage-earners through 'socialist' organizations.

[cyu]

In the construction industry, being run by the italian mob, the unions and companies work together to monopolize the market. Forcing non-union shops out of business

If guns are used by tyrants to shoot their people, does that mean all guns should be destroyed? If your democracy becomes corrupted by the wealthy, does that mean you should support authoritarians instead? Unions, guns, and democracy are just tools - the real question is who ultimately controls them.

In theory, a democracy is ultimately controlled by the voters. However, if the mass media is controlled by a wealthy minority, then they control the ideas. If they control the ideas, then they control what people vote for. So the solution isn't to throw out democracy, but to prevent a tiny minority from controlling the mass media.

As far as unions go, anarcho-syndicalists simply encourage all employees to assume democratic control of their companies. Thus the distinction between union and company management become blurred. If the employees don't even want to elect managers, then they can vote on broad policies directly, and only delegate day-to-day tasks to people specifically tasked to carry out those policies.

[blake 3:17]

Usually unionizations happen because people have specific grievances and don`t have other ways of dealing with the issue. Sudden wage or benefit cuts or stagnant wages when an employer or industry is doing well, work load increases, abusive management are pretty good instigators.

When shouldn`t you unionize? There are situations when unionizing would be a bad idea, but they`re weird ones. It depends on workplace issues and how bad the consequences of a failed unionization will be.

[hefty_lefty]

Don't get me wrong, I'm pro-union, just happens that my union isn't pro-worker.

[MarxSchmarx]

Don't get me wrong, I'm pro-union, just happens that my union isn't pro-worker.
Worse, there are downright reactionary unions, like the prison's guard unions in North America, or some of the government employees unions. I think one should always, always, always research whatever union it is they are getting on board with. even nominally "progressive" unions that have the interests of their members at heart can have simply unacceptable views like demanding the immediate deportation of illegal immigrants and whatnot.

Speaking from personal experience, it also depends on your local. Our union's head branch (I think this is called "the international" in many other unions) is pretty dismal and useless. But the rank and file that run our branch are pretty solid. We fought hard to get the bum bureaucrats gone and for our (relative) autonomy, and such vigilance on the part of regular members is ultimately key to cultivating a strong union movement.