With Unions, the Numbers Tell the Story
Newly released data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) shows union membership rates fell nationwide last year, continuing a yearslong trend. BLS’s union membership numbers also show that private sector unions remain weak and unable to attract new members, yet public sector unions—including teacher unions—remain extremely powerful.
These numbers suggest that the recent unionization drama with Amazon, Starbucks, and the auto industry says more about the media (which is heavily unionized) than about the private sector unionization movement. Considering the actual numbers (the membership rate in the private sector remains at just six percent of all workers), these disputes are desperate attempts by union organizers to keep their jobs rather than organic worker uprisings.
Meanwhile, according to BLS, membership rates for public sector unions are five times greater than their private sector counterparts. A closer analysis of last year’s BLS data shows an even greater disparity in certain states (e.g., Connecticut and New Hampshire), where public sector union membership rates were around ten times greater than in the private sector.
Considering these numbers, we should pay more attention to public sector unions than their private sector complements. The National Education Association (NEA) is not only the largest teacher union but also the largest union—period. Last year (September 2022–23), NEA reported nearly $530 million in total receipts, ending the year with $375 million in total assets, including $160 million in ready cash. Meanwhile, AFL-CIO, the most recognizable umbrella for the country’s private sector unions, reports far less: $151 million in total receipts, $124 million in total assets, and $22.7 million in cash over roughly the same period.
Why do public sector unions remain so strong relative to those in the private sector?
For starters, the public sector—driven by taxes and other sources of public revenue instead of market forces—is a more stable environment for the union model. Although governments fail in some sense, they do not go out of business or lay off workers like a failing company suffering repeated revenue drops. Governments can retain their employees by forcibly raising taxes.
Moreover, public sector union executives have the distinct advantage of propping up politicians with whom they’ll negotiate. Meanwhile, private sector unions have no choice in who runs the business.
A public sector union’s opportunity to pick its negotiating opponent often translates to higher pay for government employees over their private sector counterparts. However, union executives also use this opportunity to secure all sorts of government favors, which are more about the union than union members.
For example, many public sector unions demand contract provisions restricting members from leaving, artificially inflating membership rates. Many more unions demand contract provisions under which the government automatically deducts union dues from members’ paychecks before employees see it. The state of Oregon even promised to turn over correctional officers’ personal contact information (including home address and cell phone number) to the union despite the obvious security risks.
sector union executives also push for state laws that subsidize union operations. It’s no coincidence that Maryland, for example, has a high membership rate (97 percent) among unionized state employees. Maryland state law allows unions to secure “union release time, among other subsidies.” This little-known feature of labor law requires employers to pay the salaries and benefits of certain union executives doing union business as if they worked full-time for the government. Maryland deducts union dues from public employees’ paychecks, and it does not prohibit unions from locking employees into complex and restrictive membership arrangements. Until recently, Maryland employees had to pay fees to the union even if they weren’t members.
But there’s good news here, too: Public sector unions’ hold on government employees isn’t a lock.
State legislatures can pass laws that rein in unionization and membership recruitment and protect employees. States can choose a different path by, for example, ending artificial union subsidies and requiring union executives to prove their value to employees. States can follow Florida’s lead: Last year, the Sunshine State ended union payroll deductions and doubled down on recertification, forcing unions to demonstrate actual support from membership to remain in power.
Until then, expect the same BLS data story next year.
No comments:
Post a Comment