Unions suffer sharp decline in membership

WASHINGTON (AP) - The nation's labor unions suffered sharp declines in membership last year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said Wednesday, led by losses in the public sector as cash-strapped state and local governments laid off workers and - in some cases - limited collective bargaining rights.
The union membership rate fell from 11.8 percent to 11.3 percent of all workers, the lowest level since the 1930s.
Total membership fell by about 400,000 workers to 14.4 million. More than half the loss - about 234,000 - came from government workers including teachers, firefighters and public administrators.
The losses add another blow to a labor movement already stretched thin by fighting efforts in states like Wisconsin, Indiana and Michigan to curb bargaining rights and weaken union clout.
But unions also saw losses in the private sector, even as the economy expanded modestly. That rate fell of membership fell from 6.9 percent to 6.6 percent, a troubling sign for the future of organized labor, as job growth has generally taken place at nonunion firms.
"To employers, it's going to look like the labor movement is ready for a knockout punch," said Gary Chaison, professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass. "You can't be a movement and get smaller."
Unions have steadily lost members since their peak in the 1950s, when about one of every three workers was in a union. By 1983, roughly 20 percent of American workers were union members.
Losses in the public sector are hitting unions particularly hard since that has been one of the few areas where membership was growing over the past two decades. About 51 percent of union members work in government, where until recently, there had been little resistance to union organizing.
That began to change when Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker signed a law in 2011 eliminating most union rights for government workers. The state lost about 46,000 union members last year, mostly in the public sector.
Union officials blame losses on the lingering effects of the recession, as well as GOP governors and state lawmakers who have sought to weaken union rights.
"Our still-struggling economy, weak laws and political as well as ideological assaults have taken a toll on union membership, and in the process have also imperiled economic security and good, middle class jobs," said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.
In Indiana, where a new right-to-work law took effect last March, the state lost about 56,000 union members. The law prohibits unions from requiring workers to pay union fees, even if they benefit from a collective bargaining agreement. Michigan lawmakers approved a similar measure in December.
Another problem for unions is an aging membership that is not being replaced by younger members. By age, the union membership rate was highest among workers ages 55 to 64 (14.9 percent) and lowest among those ages 16 to 24 (4.2 percent).
In New York, the state with the highest union density, nearly one-quarter of the workforce belonged to a union. North Carolina had the lowest at 2.9 percent.
Among full-time wage and salary workers, union members in 2012 had median weekly earnings of $943, while those who were not union members earned $742.
The union membership rate fell from 11.8 percent to 11.3 percent of all workers, the lowest level since the 1930s.
Total membership fell by about 400,000 workers to 14.4 million. More than half the loss - about 234,000 - came from government workers including teachers, firefighters and public administrators.
The losses add another blow to a labor movement already stretched thin by fighting efforts in states like Wisconsin, Indiana and Michigan to curb bargaining rights and weaken union clout.
But unions also saw losses in the private sector, even as the economy expanded modestly. That rate fell of membership fell from 6.9 percent to 6.6 percent, a troubling sign for the future of organized labor, as job growth has generally taken place at nonunion firms.
"To employers, it's going to look like the labor movement is ready for a knockout punch," said Gary Chaison, professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass. "You can't be a movement and get smaller."
Unions have steadily lost members since their peak in the 1950s, when about one of every three workers was in a union. By 1983, roughly 20 percent of American workers were union members.
Losses in the public sector are hitting unions particularly hard since that has been one of the few areas where membership was growing over the past two decades. About 51 percent of union members work in government, where until recently, there had been little resistance to union organizing.
That began to change when Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker signed a law in 2011 eliminating most union rights for government workers. The state lost about 46,000 union members last year, mostly in the public sector.
Union officials blame losses on the lingering effects of the recession, as well as GOP governors and state lawmakers who have sought to weaken union rights.
"Our still-struggling economy, weak laws and political as well as ideological assaults have taken a toll on union membership, and in the process have also imperiled economic security and good, middle class jobs," said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.
In Indiana, where a new right-to-work law took effect last March, the state lost about 56,000 union members. The law prohibits unions from requiring workers to pay union fees, even if they benefit from a collective bargaining agreement. Michigan lawmakers approved a similar measure in December.
Another problem for unions is an aging membership that is not being replaced by younger members. By age, the union membership rate was highest among workers ages 55 to 64 (14.9 percent) and lowest among those ages 16 to 24 (4.2 percent).
In New York, the state with the highest union density, nearly one-quarter of the workforce belonged to a union. North Carolina had the lowest at 2.9 percent.
Among full-time wage and salary workers, union members in 2012 had median weekly earnings of $943, while those who were not union members earned $742.
 """""""Unions suffer sharp decline in membership"""""""
Â
Well at least that is a small silver lining in this misrable economy.
If you want to see what Unions do to a town look at Detroit. The town is so empty
they can't give houses away and they were debating setting up farming because the
town is so vacant.
And, I think Tri-Met has an overtime problem because the union pay and benefits is
so high. Its cheaper to pay overtime than hire another union worker.
Look at this Trumka guy. Trim his mustache and he looks just like Hitler
My relatives were union men back in Ohio. Many have passed away now, but when they were alive the union was the only way to go. My Dad, after he got out of service, took my Mom and left Ohio to get away from the union atmosphere and lousey Ohio weather and headed west. I don't like unions because dues may go to support causes I don't agree with.
Where's my man Ralphcramdon?
Â
Â
This is good news to him. The only thing he likely hates more than Unions is cancer, and i get he would say, "What's the difference?"
Â
 @RepomanÂ
Am I really that predictable??? 8-}
Â
Unions are one of the main reasons companies leave the US.
 @RalphCramden  @Repoman Yes you are, Ralph, anything that benefits labor or makes life a little easier for the have nots you seem to be always against,
it's like you're against poor people.
 @No_Conservitards  @RepomanÂ
I am self employed. I don't get any time off unless I want time off. I work weekends, don't get overtime, have no vacation unless I want a vacation, don't get a dime when I am sick or injured.
Â
BS on your Jefferson comment if you are talking about Thomas Jefferson unless you are talking about George Jefferson on the TV show, The Jeffersons.
Â
Companies are leaving the US for countries that have no unions. It allows them to be more flexible, to make changes in business plans without consulting the union for permission.
Â
Hopefully the government will run out of money and dump the unions which was supported by FDR.
Â
"Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable." - FDR
 @RalphCramden  @No_Conservitards  @Repoman Then I expect you to voluntarily give up all the things that unions fought for that we enjoy today. Everything. vacation, sickpay, overtime, All of it. even your weekend. Jefferson said anything against labor was against America. Being against Unions is being against Labor. Labor precedes capital. Conservatives don't seem to know that. Unions help make companies more democratic by giving them a voice. You seem to want to stifle that voice.
I sincerely hope you one day see the error of that way.
 @No_Conservitards  @RepomanÂ
I am against unions. It has nothing to do with poor people.
Â
Here is what happens when costs get too high for business. They move. Many move over seas to avoid the 4 horses of the apocalypse, taxes, unions, labor costs and regulations.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/23/california-residents-businesses-consider-bailing-on-golden-state-over-taxes/
Â
Unions strangle business and are a definite negative for the government. My hope is that government runs out of more money and has to lay off even more workers. It looks like California is doing just that.
"Our still-struggling economy, weak laws and political as well as ideological assaults have taken a toll on union membership, and in the process have also imperiled economic security and good, middle class jobs," said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka."
Â
Actually Richard, this is why union membership is declining:Â Lining your own pockets and those of your fellow union officers at the expense of your members;Â The unions' priority of preservation of the union rather than promotion of the worker;Â Unions create conflict in the workplace just to justify their existence;Â Unions will eat their young in favor of seniority irrespective of knowledge, skill, ability, and productivity; Unions create an entitlement mentality that stifles individual incentive;Â Unions' willingness to close a business rather than make a concession so members can remain gainfully employed;Â Defending union workers who have grossly violated workplace rules;Â Failure to develop programs to help union members achieve success;Â Lobbying for laws that benefit unions rather than operating unions that benefit workers; Contributing to the demise of American competitiveness in the world;Â Striking when so many are out of work and the economy is frail;Â Â etc., etc., etc.
Â
Look for an enthusiastic "can do" workforce in any union shop and you will be hard pressed to find one. Unions have developed a culture that has sucked the personal motivation out of their members and replaced it with a "we all get the same whether we work hard or not so why make the effort" mentality. Unions should have learned something from the failed socialism of the USSR but they haven't. Their continued push for socialist employment policies will continue to drive down American competitiveness in the world and drive down union membership. But they just don't get it.
Unions.......legalized extortion. And it sure doesn't look alike Richrd's missed a meal lately !!
A tenured professor at MHCC has support from one of several unions that compete with each other to see who can screw the college and the community out of the most. As a college student at MHCC you ended up with professors who cannot be fired for incompetence but who can decide to go on strike if the taxpayers and college kids in the community don't subsidize their work environment. As a result, a small minority of employees at any union who are there by seniority but not competence, wield a huge amount of influence over their fellow employees and the community.It has broken the back of the college and the community and the downward spiral is apparent. 70% of Boeing airplanes are outsourced overseas but unions throw lawsuits when Boeing tries to open a domestic non-union plant.
Â
It doesn't matter what promises have been made by whom, or who thinks they're entitled to what, or what happened back in 1900; the fact is, America can't afford it right now and union employees enjoy a better-than-average standard of living for the education and training required of them, so, it's obviously not about a "fair" living wage...they want more than the non-union sector to make sure they stay relevant and desirable.
I learned at age 16 that unions do NOT look out for the employee. My first job in retail required union membership. I got to pay the initiation fee and the monthly dues but was not allowed to work more than 20 hours per week because if I did, they would also have to provide me with health and pension benefits. Then, when the union went on strike, I damn near got beat up by going to work (crossing the picket line). I needed to work so that I could pay for my car, gas, insurance, etc, and no union thug was going to keep me from earning money. And I certainly wasn't going to expect my parents to pay these expenses, after all, they were my expenses.
I spent several years in Ironworkers local 29 and I have no complaints.
 @PointblankÂ
Â
Hey my uncle was in charge of that local for a long time. He tried to get me to join but iron working is not my cup.
Â
He spent more than 50 years as a member. I think he recently retired.
Â
It's part of my familyâs legacy as a member of various unions. Teamster, Ironworkers, etc.
Â
My uncle was a good leader, my grandfather, not so much.
Â
@Pointblank I am sure you dont. It sounds like you are no longer in Ironworkers local 29. Why is that? Did they become uncompetitive and no longer have any work for you?
When I was a lot younger, working my way through college in NYC, I worked part-time at a supermarket chain. I had to join the union, Local 400 of the Amalgamated Meatcutters and Butchers Workmen Union, complete with initiation fee and monthly dues. As a checkout clerk, the only meat I ever touched came through on the counter conveyor and was then put in the bag for the customer. When I left, I got a "retirement card", (which I surprisingly still have). I have never gotten any of the alleged benefits and obviously never intended to stay in that line of business for my entire working life. I was really a supporter of right to work initiatives at the time, and have not been a union fan since then!Â
 @jpkÂ
Â
Grocers joined unions because United Grocers became union.
Â
United Grocers became union because truckers unionized.
Â
You can thank my grandfather for that.
Â
When the Teamsters got truckers to unionize they used that as leverage to get distributors to unionize. The rule was, you can't use my trucks, or my drivers to get your groceries (produce mostly at the time) to your distribution center. Thus distribution centers unionized.
Â
When the Teamsters got the distribution centers to unionize the rule was no produce to non union stores. Thus the stores became union. Because the rule was complete (all people even baggers had to be union) it meant that the part-time kid who counted bottles, got paid minimum wage and go benefits, had to pay dues as well.
Â
Â
Â
@Repoman   A wonderful example of the strong arm tactics used by the union thugs.
I worked for the Greater Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company in NYC, commonly called A&P.
as member of the United Stoplight Windshield Cleaners Union I blame those space aliens coming down here an abducting people, then implanting computer chips in their brain. everyone brainwahed and i get no bizness!
 @PhuzzÂ
Â
Well friend, keep your towell dirty, your curse laced mumblings to yourself and the lice out of the car and one day your business will flourish!
Â
@PhuzzÂ
Â
phaschilly
if unions were actually doing what was beneficial for workers instead of just trying to flex their muscles with employers and line their own pockets, this might not be happening.
Perhaps when the unions start working for their membership instead of themselves the tide will turn.
Finally some good news in the news! The comments about "losing" union membership probably has more to do with the fact that some employees no longer are forced to join the union by the thug organizations to get a job .
Unions - Promoters of mediocrity and the lowest common denominator as the standard of performance. Loss of membership couldn't happen to a better group.
Could situations such as the Hostess failure be a small part of the decline? Â 7500 union jobs lost to just that (18,000 overall). Â I don't know, I've managed to make a fair living without ever having been a member of a union. Â Granted, I've been laid off 4 times since 2000 but I manage to survive and move on. Â Those companies continue to survive because they did what they had to to meet their budget. Â Unions make that difficult, IMHO.
Â
There's a difference between the conditions in the early 20th century factories which were more like China are today than the conditions of today with Federally mandated employment laws and employee protection.
 @negativerep well I'm not sure, Hostess was planned though. Those managers didn't want to do what it would take to make the company profitable, they wanted to sell out or cause it to go into bankruptcy so they could sell off the assets.  Their very interest from the beginning was to sell off the assets.
@beesknees I disagree. I am sure their interest was to be as profitable as possible but the union decided that they wanted to play hardball. Unfortunatly if you are going to play hardball, you have to be prepared to lose (have a "Plan B") because now they have NO JOB. In the end, it was better for them to sell the assets and tell the union to take a hike.
@Ramsesthegreat That was thier decision to make. If the union membership wants to start thier own companies, they can run them however they want. When they try to hold a company hostage by striking, they get what they deserve......unemployment.
@scared_citizen yes, the union is what caused the management to immediately give themselves 75%-300% wage increases to themselves upon taking over the company. Face it, the management of Hostess destroyed that company while laughing all the way to the bank.
@negativerep Exactly and if the government mandates those employment laws and employee protection, who SHOULD need a union less, a public sector employee or a public sector (government) employee? Police, Fire Fighter and Teacher unions should be banned.
 @scared_citizen  @negativerepÂ
Â
Actually my boss (who heads the "interface" with the union) really likes it. It means treating everyone who is a member like a cookie cutter clone.
Â
What this means is, once it is in "the contract" it is done. That's the rule. No having to think about it, no having to debate. No "why then was he able toâ¦" because if it ain't there, it don't happen.
Â
Makes management of a cohort of equally important people simple and straightforward.
Â
Thus why it works for the cog like bureaucracy that makes up much of our public works. And the advantage of that is that it treats every citizen the same (how would you like it if your neighbor got to do thing you could not because he was friends with someone at the zoning office?).
Â
So there is a good advantage to having a union for public servants. The issue from that is, do we as taxpayers get the same advantage pubic employee managers get for having unionized employees?
Â
Â
@Repoman     "Thus why it works for the cog like bureaucracy that makes up much of our public works. And the advantage of that is that it treats every citizen the same (how would you like it if your neighbor got to do thing you could not because he was friends with someone at the zoning office?).
Â
Are you kidding me? The lower level government entities are no less corrupt than the big "man" in the White House and his cronies.
Â
Â
"Among full-time wage and salary workers, union members in 2012 had median weekly earnings of $943, while those who were not union members earned $742."
Â
Who would've thunk ?? I guess that "unions are bad" and "we don't need no unions anymores" thingy is right.....D'OH !
Â
"Experts attribute the causes to various factors: the decline of organized labor, the erosion of the minimum wage, the shift from a manufacturing-based to a service-based economy, and the transformation to a more globalized economy. But a common thread is the choking of America's besieged middle class."
Â
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/strangling-middle-class-america/story?id=11325933
@sargerator
What it means is that the union families think they deserve more, or work harder than the non-union sector, and as such they deserve that much more. It means they're interested in financial superiority, not working-class equality.My kid goes to a private school with no union members and is learning multiplication and the history of western civilization in the first grade. They got to go up to Seattle to see the Tut exhibit, which was her first field trip ever. Taught by Catholics, but halfway through her first year she can already describe Egyptian gods and is going to the art museum on Saturday to see the Greek exhibit.
Â
If public school parents and taxpayers think that they need unions to protect their children's education, they're being conned. Big-time.
@Playanekes most union employees i know believe in faint compensation for a job done, not financial superiority, that's left to the executives who believe they actually work hard enough to deserve anywhere near the millions per year that they make.
@Ramsesthegreat Most of the union employees I have seen hide behind the skirts of the union to protect their incompetence or outright criminality.
 @sargerator Everyone has to adjust as we go to a world economy. I am not in a union but my industry is hit just as hard when they can hire 5 people in China or 3 people in India for what I get paid. Companies are and will continue to do what is best for them and we have to adapt.
Â
I don't have much respect for unions because the do promote lazy workers, length of service determining pay not skill, they act like thugs regularly, keep workers employed that should have lost their job due to their actions legal and illegal.
@FreedomRocks in other words, get used to low wages, no benefits, and longer hours while management gives themselves raises and tells the employees their payouts are due to not being able to compete with slave labor in China.
@Ramsesthegreat I have never worked for a union but in the companies, I have worked for, my talents and skills have always caused my employers to value me as an employee and my pay rose and my position increased. When the work load was heavy, yes, I was asked to work longer hours but I was always paid for the hours I worked. This is partially because the law dictates how employers can now treat employees but also my employers valued me and wanted to make sure I stayed with them as I could take my skills and talents to whoever I wanted to work for. Today, it would be harder to get a job with benefits because of the coming Obamacare fiasco. Companies would now rather hire temps than permanent employees because the cost of Obamcare will be substantial. As for Chinese labor, that can happen in a manufacturing type job but that is not what i do. If a Chinese person wants my job, they will have to come here to do it.
Paycuts not payouts.
@FreedomRocks Exactly. All you have to do is look at something like the Seattle Police Department and the Seattle Police Officers Guild (SPOG) and see that the primary purpose of the union is to protect employees that should otherwise be terminated.
@kramr I agree and I am sure that there are plenty of other examples of this exact activity.
@scared_citizen   """""""that the primary purpose of the union is to protect employees that should otherwise be terminated""""""
Â
Same could be said for many of the teachers in my kids school district......
There are a good many of them that would be canned in a new york second if it wasn't for the unions.....