We should be careful with this sort of partial truth. In my area, there is an industry where the non-union workers do make more than the union workers. This, of course, is because the company has to compete against the union wage and adds some more on top as a “pls don’t unionize and make this worse” sort of counter-propaganda. It’s worth it to them.
It is also because the local union for this industry is strangled by liberal leadership, which is elected by its disengaged membership.
I want to present this anecdote because I don’t think this situation is uncommon, so when we simplify the situation down to somebody with anti-union brainworms we may end up looking foolish or just wrong to them.
No problem, your point is well made. There are always going to be outliers to almost any narrative no matter how truthful, and they should be acknowledged and even explained.
Unionized workers make more than non-unionized workers almost as a rule, wages gains typically overshadow dues.
We should be careful with this sort of partial truth. In my area, there is an industry where the non-union workers do make more than the union workers. This, of course, is because the company has to compete against the union wage and adds some more on top as a “pls don’t unionize and make this worse” sort of counter-propaganda. It’s worth it to them.
It is also because the local union for this industry is strangled by liberal leadership, which is elected by its disengaged membership.
I want to present this anecdote because I don’t think this situation is uncommon, so when we simplify the situation down to somebody with anti-union brainworms we may end up looking foolish or just wrong to them.
That is why I used the words almost and typically.
fair. I guess I didn’t read closely my b
No problem, your point is well made. There are always going to be outliers to almost any narrative no matter how truthful, and they should be acknowledged and even explained.