Re: New paper just out

On 5/8/2025 4:51 PM, Shadow wrote:

On Wed, 7 May 2025 20:21:03 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
 

We recently discussed industrial development/decrepitude as
regards especially steel. This just published:
>
https://www.mercatus.org/research/working-papers/do-more-powerful-unions-generate-better-pro-worker-outcomes

  Depends on the union. Brazil's CUT always defended the
worker's best interests, as did the Sindicato de Metalurgicos do ABC.
They also fought against the military dictatorship and eventually
restored something like a democracy in Brasil.
There are a lot of "bad" unions, which we call "patronais".
The leaders are bribed into allowing salaries to fall.  They then
announce that "we managed to convince the administration to cut your
salaries by ONLY 5% this year."
LOL Examples  ---> Forca Sindical and CGT
Unions are voted in by category (medical, metallurgical,
agricultural, banks etc) but are not mandatory. You give a day's
salary per year if you want them to represent you.
I'd pay if it was CUT, but if one of the corrupt ones was
voted in I wouldn't.
  PS Check your sources (mercatus.org). I would never trust a
"study" sponsored by Koch industries, specially if it defends cutting
salaries to make the rich richer.
[]'s

I agree, there's nothing inherent to free association which necessarily leads to extortion and corruption.  That said, the range across unions is vast and the excesses are painfully expensive to the nation.
(Mercatus reported on it)
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971