what is the benifit of a labor unions?
961709
The time is the present for labor unions to come back with a mission.  Labor unions try to bargain with companies for fair wage and working conditions.  It's come down now to try and  bargain to even keep the company in the U.S.  \n\nYears ago, before unions, workers were being treated unfairly and cruelly by corporations.  They made them work long hours without overtime.  They paid them meager wages.  They threatened them all the time and would treat their favorites much better than the others.  The workers had no benefits.\n\nWhen unions were formed, heads of corporations unwillingly were forced to bargain and and sign agreements to provide better working environments, better wages, and made to be fair with all employees.  There was a time when all workers went on strike, it rendered the corporation inoperable and they would lose money.  The benefit of labor unions is to ensure employees are treated fairly in the workplace and that is why we now have the Fair Labor Act.
387699
Labor unions really declined in the late 1880s.  The Knights didn't help themselves by failing on some strikes.  When the AFL came along in 1886, they lost many members to them.
442444
Yes, unions have a vital place in US current society as proven by modern and ancient history. In any society the largest number of people are the working class. This group is made up of those who must work to provide for food, shelter and clothing for themselves and their families. In any society people without large amounts of money lack bargaining power and standing alone they do not have access to meet their needs in a crises. They live at the mercy of those in power. By standing together in a unified manner, the whole is greater then the separate and this gives them bargaining power to provide for individual needs such as fair compensation for a fair amount of work.
609173
Bottom line MONEY.  The UFCW will tell you time and time again it's for the benefit of the Walmart employees, but that's a blatant lie.  It's for the benefit of the UFCW management.\n\nIf WalMart Employees wanted a union, they could form a powerful union on their own.  The major problem with this issue, if you increase costs to Walmart, you increase prices of products, you reduce your market share, and then the jobs start going away.  That's probably the reality the Walmart Employees understand.
1048772
Actually, billions of dollars a year in profits.  Wal-Mart (WMT) posted $11.39 Billion in net income (revenue - expenditure).  And yes, there have been studies shown that if Wal-Mart brought it's wages back up to industry standard, they would still be a very profitable company.\n\nHowever, unions are complicated and serve to differentiate workers from the general population, not serve the best interests of everyone.  And, unions are not the right answer for low-skilled/low-wage earners.  For instance, the reason why autoworkers have a powerful union is because Ford or Chevy can't just hire anyone off the street to build a car or operate machinery.  Nor can Delta grab one if it's passengers out of first class and have them fly a 747.  The more skilled and irreplaceable a worker, the more power unions have.  Wal-Mart and McDonalds pay their workers hardly anything because they have developed a system to where just about anyone can be thrown into a Wal-Mart or McDonalds and have all the training they would need to be an effective employee in a day or so.  Furthermore, there's less and less demand for low-skilled workers in today's global economy.  Typical low-skilled jobs in manufacturing have headed overseas, and if you don't posses the skills in today's world to succeed, you're out of luck.  Still, too many unskilled service jobs in the US remain underpaid.  But is that fair to low-skilled American labor?\n\nUnfortunately, I don't think it is.  It was recently reported that the drop-out rate in Los Angeles area high schools was as high as 25%.  While it's important to provide education for our nation's youngsters and propel them into workforce, children coming from well established backgrounds have a much, much better chance at succeeding.  Conversely, kids that come from 'the other side of the tracks' have a much much lower chance at succeeding and do not proceed into adulthood with the skills they need to earn a respectable living.  And to clarify respectable, I mean above the poverty line.\n\nGetting back to your question, the primary fault for low wages at McDonalds and Wal-Mart are not those companies’ policies.  They make the best possible financial decisions given the circumstances in which their business operates.  And, if it was in Wal-Mart's best interests to pay workers more, they would.  Management at Wal-Mart is paid very handsomely.  In order to make a difference and pull our nation's poor out of poverty, the government needs to intervene by increasing the minimum wage and punish companies that employ illegal hiring practices.  As it stands, the President and Congress would rather fill the coffers of American corporations with excess profits than provide help to those that need it the most: the working poor.  Just recently, Congress struck down legislation that would raise the minimum wage providing no help to many Americans that are struggling to make ends meet.  \n\nHow can we justify the minimum wage at $5.15 an hour?\n\nLet's take for example a couple with no children -- the most financially stable and well off household classification -- working full time at minimum wage levels.  Husband and wife combined would earn roughly $1600/mo..  For the sake of this example I am omitting any payroll taxes or other paycheck deductions.  Our couple lives in a 1-bedroom apartment that rents with utilities for $600/mo..  That leaves the couple 1,000 to spend on food, clothing, medicine, and transportation - necessities in life.  2 people eat roughly 180 meals a month, and at $3.00 a meal it is $540.  A montly bus pass in Los Angeles, and most major cities, is about $50/mo. per person, or $100/mo. for both.  So far, our theoretical couple has spent $1,240 of their $1600 budget.  That leaves $360 for health care, entertainment, clothing, household goods (toilet paper, soap, towels, TV), and retirement savings (even minimum wage earners aren't exempt from s
1052126
Labor is inexpensive. The workforce is extremely knowledgeable and has good experience.
378204
Even though they settled, if they were to strike, I would be supportive. The Government seems to be hell-bent on destroying Unions, and taking away health care. I would expect that if your boss told you he wanted you to take a wage cut, pay for all your health care, and reduce (or eliminate) your pension benefits, you would strike to if you could.
729245
The best time for unions to go on strike is when the economy has either been doing extremely well, or if there's low productivity or if there's high inflation.  \n\nRecently productivity has hit a brick wall.  Call me cynical, but I think gas prices *will* go up significantly after the election.  I think we're going to be looking at a stagflation economy pretty soon.
550201
What a great question!  A lot of people don't understand that the benefits a company offers will increase your total compensation package.  \n\nAccording to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, benefits\naccount for nearly 35%of an employee’s total compensation. Yet, more than half of all employees don’t understand or\nappreciate the value of their employer-paidbenefits.\n\nBenefits include items such as insurance and health benefits,\nsocial security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, workers’\ncompensation, defined contribution, defined benefit, retirement and savings, supplemental pay vacations, holidays and sick leave.
824042
This is what makes labor unions and collective bargaining a "necessary evil".  I have been a lifelong union member and I can assure you, without them, we'd all be working for $.50 per hour.
133276
Unions hurt big business, plain and simple.  On the flip side, unions also protect people who don't deserve protection.
176670
An organization of workers of the same trade (or of several allied trades) for the purpose of negotiating with employers and securing favorable conditions regarding wages, hours of labor, etc.
1125573
The simple existence of unions helps all workers. Even if you don't belong to one, the reason you get benefits is because of the labor movement. Employers would never pay you to stay home, as in vacation and sick leave and holidays. Companies are interested in the bottom line: maximum profit. Therefore employees are just another overhead expense, like the electric bill. What does the company get from you when you're on vacation? Without unions, or the fear that workers might organize, employers would get away with much more than they do already. Imagine everyone fending for themselves on the job. You might make half as much as the person working next to you doing the same job. You could be fired for refusing to do something dangerous, or on a whim. If you get hurt on the job, laws fought for by unions protect you. Companies do not give workers benefits, raises and safe working conditions because they're nice people. They do it because they have to. And only about 15% of the workforce belong to a union.
953092
Union busting is as old as the industrial age. Closing factories and retail outlets to break unions has been common since the end of the nineteenth century. Closing a store is a lot less expensive to a company like Wal-Mart than letting a union be established.\n\nIt is too bad that here in the United States the Unions have an adversarial relationship with management. In many countries Unions work with management and not against them—it is one of the secrets of Japan's success. \n\nIt is clear that here in the United States the distribution of wealth within most companies is enormously unfair. With executives making hundreds of millions of dollars in salary and perks while the average worker is not making a living wage--something is very wrong with this formula. \n\nThis is probably a great time for Unions to revive. This time they must keep the crooks away and work with management and the government. There is clearly a need for organized labor in America and I am a conservative and have served in senior management positions.
646463
No, but an increase in wages would increase the costs of many goods and services depending on how labor intensive they are. So that would offset the increase by a good portion. I personally think that increasing it based on personal preformance is a better adjustment to make.
489225
Unfortunately, there is steep competition for the good paying easy jobs, or they aren't good paying, or easy...\n\nThink about working for the government.  Union influence is so strong in some government positions, that you can benefit nearly to the point of corruption.\n\nThe union will defend an employees' laziness, incompetence, and inadequacy as long as possible.  And those types of positions will pay much more than the light workload suggests.\n\nThese jobs provide an enviroment that is wonderful for someone who is actually skilled and works diligently.  Pay is good to great, and the benefits are amazing.
1121563
National Labor Union and Knights of Labor  I think.