Response to the CWA

In this post I will respond to some assertions that the CWA has made in a pamphlet they used for their "Lunchtime Lingo", which was supposed to be a discussion they had during their lunchtime about union issues. Here is a link to the original pamphlet http://files.cwa-union.org/district6/Lunchtimelingo22709.pdf .

Under the section "Collective Bargaining is a Public Good"

"-It strengthens our democracy. You can't have a democracy without strong, independent, democratic unions."

“It had been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience had proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.”
Alexander Hamilton June 21, 1788

First off, this country was never intended to be a pure democracy. On the other hand if you are talking about the more loose definition of democracy, as in our representative government that we currently have, the second part of this statement by the CWA is obviously false since this country prospered for almost 200 years without a strong union presence.

"-It raises everyone's wages, not just union members."

The immediate effect of a labor union forcing a certain wage on an employer is for the employer to downsize the positions that are not worth whatever that minimum wage is. All you have to do is look at what happened to the percentage of teenage employment as the government has implemented the minimum wage, and continued to raise it.
For a longer term effect lets take a look at industries that the unions have traditionally had a strong presence in.
Mining
Steel working
Textile
Auto
Teaching
In every instance the union has taken a thriving US industry and destroyed it. Though there is a temporary boost to the current workers' pay and benefits, it ultimately hurts more people than it helps.

"-It reduces wage inequality and demands that workers get a fair share of the profits."

This assertion is one of the most ridiculous statements I have encountered in a long time. No employee of any company is entitled to the profits of the company they work for. Each of us as individuals has a certain skill set we are able to trade to the company that we work for in exchange for an hourly wage or yearly salary. In every instance the individual willing to work for that wage, values that wage more than the time they are spending working for that company, and the company values the work that employee is doing more than the money they spend for that employee. It is a fair trade, I cannot think of a rational argument that someone could make that would show where an employee of a company is entitled to the profits of that company.

"-It promotes political participation by workers."

If by political participation they mean confiscating union dues straight out of paychecks, and donating them to the Democrat candidates on behalf of the union membership regardless of the approval of the members, I guess you are technically right there.

"-It promotes healthy and safe work environments."

It is a good thing they are on top of this, or else people would be losing limbs every day over there in the call center.

-On page four of the pamphlet

"The middle class is shrinking."

While this is true, the lower class is not where they are going. The lower class is actually shrinking along with the middle class, the class that is growing is the upper middle and upper class which I don't know anyone except a straight up Marxist that would believe this is a bad thing.

I thought I would address in this post some of the easiest points to refute. I welcome comment, and would love a discussion along these lines. Thanks.