Job Security? Not Really, Not In the Long Run

uaw Job Security? Not Really, Not In the Long RunFrom “The UAW’s Awakening” in today’s :

“The problem with unions is not all that dissimilar to that posed by entrenched management: Once they win comfortable contracts, they often become to the kind of innovation and flexibility essential to success in today’s economy. So in the name of “,” they undermine a company’s — or a nation’s — . The result, over time, is less for everyone, especially the . There’s no better example of this than , where the UAW now represents about 74,000 hourly workers, compared to 246,000 in 1994. Some security.”


This is economics, paraphrased from and :

For a time, unionized workers enjoy higher and . In the long run, however, investment will move away from firms with low (Ford and ). To the extent that the profits of unionized firms are lower (, Ford), investment expenditures will flow into the nonunion sector (Toyota, Honda, Nissan) and away from unionized firms. As a result, the growth of both productivity and employment, as well as , will tend to lag in the unionzed sector.

The larger the wage premium of unionized firms and the greater the of job stability, the greater the incentive to shift production toward nonunion operations. shows that industries and companies with the largest union wage and greatest of job stability are precisely the industries and companies with the largest in the employment of unionized workers.

: Gains in the short run of higher-than-market and benefits, and greater , eventually undermine the companies employing unionized workers, destroying of union jobs in the long run. The more success a union has in the short-run, the greater the failure in the long run. The discipline of the market eventually dominates and prevails.

Related posts

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Daily News | Mortgage Site | Mortgage Rates