Union membership falls sharply, led by decline among public sector workers

  • Article by: SAM HANANEL , Associated Press
  • Updated: January 23, 2013 - 3:55 PM
  • 9
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 9 of 9
Mrs.JackJonesJan. 23, 1310:54 AM

Unions are still forcing companies to take jobs out of the country because excessive labor cost. When will they wake up and realize that less costs means more jobs.

4
11
gadams500Jan. 23, 1311:38 AM

"Less costs means more jobs" More low paying jobs that erode the middle class, create a working poor class, and line executives pockets at everyone elses expense.

9
4
redblack30Jan. 23, 1311:43 AM

JackJones is correct that low wages mean more jobs. Personally, I could hire several servants to clean my house, cook, etc. if they would agree to work for Third World wages. The question is do we want to preserve and enlarge the American middle class? It is no coincidence that middle class wages have been stagnant while Unions have been getting weaker.

8
1
redblack30Jan. 23, 1311:47 AM

JackJones is correct that low wages mean more jobs. Personally, I could hire several servants to clean my house, cook, etc. if they would agree to work for Third World wages. The question is do we want to preserve and enlarge the American middle class? It is no coincidence that middle class wages have been stagnant while Unions have been getting weaker.

3
1
chuckdancerJan. 23, 1312:09 PM

It is not hard to see what the boys warn about when they rail about the power of unions. When almost 7 of 100 private sector workers are in a union that is real power capable controlling the US economy. It must be hard for the billionaire capitalists to invest hundreds of billions of dollars of their own personal funds in a patriotic gesture to their fellow citizens only to find out that that they have to pay a dime over minimum wage to workers under the influence of a union.

3
2
member11Jan. 23, 13 1:27 PM

Yet another sign that the wealthy and powerful are well on their way to destroying the middle class and turning their employees into serfs working for peanuts.

2
0
asdfasdfJan. 23, 13 1:33 PM

It's very simple... look at the graphs of worker compensation and union membership. It's not rocket science. Corporations merge to increase leverage and negotiate better deals. Why labor should be any other way is beyond me.

3
0
tnesleyJan. 23, 13 2:15 PM

The wealthy and powerful people you describe are Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morgan, and Ford a century ago. Today's power brokers are global corporations...whose goal is to produce products to the customer for the lowest cost. Today’s unions should partner with US corporations to build an economic environment (taxes and regulations) to bring jobs back to the USA. The "stick it to the man" attitude is self defeating.

1
1
martin64Jan. 23, 13 2:37 PM

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. = This says it all. If people don't recognize what the rich are trying to do, we are but lobsters n the pot.

1
0
  • 1 - 9 of 9

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Where will the Twins finish in the AL Central this season?

Weekly Question

ADVERTISEMENT

Offers & Events

Showcase MN for chance to WIN

Showcase MN for chance to WIN

Mix a video with our footage to get a chance at a $1,000 vacation gift card

Start on your mix now.


ADVERTISEMENT