Why do you shop at Sam’s Club? Is it because you believe that you can get a better deal there than at other stores in your area?
But you also pay a membership fee for this privilege, correct? Your right to shop at Sam’s Club is dependent on your being a member — paying the $40 per year fee required, so you may purchase those items of your choosing. This membership fee, you might claim, gives Sam’s Club the ability to keep prices low.
So would it be fair to allow those who have not paid for membership to shop at the store, to reap the same benefits that Sam’s Club members get? We suspect that most of you would answer no; that with membership come certain rights — a privilege — that should not be afforded to those who are not members. After all, if you have to pay for that right, others should have to also.
So, how is the Sam’s Club membership fee different than the fee that labor unions charge their members? Oh, right. In some states you now do not have to pay the union fee to get the union benefits.
This is the debate currently being played out across the nation, most recently in Michigan when the governor supported right-to-work legislation. What that legislation does is remove a requirement that currently compels workers who choose not to join a union to still pay union dues. Such a provision ultimately undermines the power of unions by creating a free-rider problem, granting people the benefits of unionization without them having to bear the cost.
Of the 74,000 Maine workers, or 13.4 percent, represented by a union in 2011, only 63,000 of them, or 11.3 percent, were dues-paying union members: 11,000 workers did not report union membership but directly benefited from representation. The odds are that a considerable number of Maine workers beyond this group have benefited indirectly from the work norms that unions have fought hard to establish. Among them are paid leave and vacation time, employer-supported health insurance, pension plans and the assurance of fair wages in a safe working environment.
Importantly, unions have long been at the forefront of efforts to negotiate higher wages and more favorable working conditions that have ultimately benefited all workers, including those not unionized. Unions have played a pivotal role not only in securing workplace safety standards but in ending child labor practices as well. They introduced collective bargaining for fair wages and hours and benefits, and they worked to secure workers’ rights, including employee representation and the establishment of grievance procedures.
In Maine, more than 32 unions actively serve a broad array of professionals: Among them are building and construction workers, office workers, plumbers and pipefitters, service employees and food workers, nurses, teachers, electricians and state workers.
Mainers’ longstanding traditions of association and collaboration have enabled them to obtain more value from limited incomes. Farmers’ cooperatives, homeowners’ associations and buying clubs have long been a part of economic life throughout Maine, alongside core values of self-reliance and independence.
We know that economic progress results when intellectual, entrepreneurial, managerial and labor power are combined to produce the goods and services necessary to satisfy society’s wants and needs. When the rewards earned from these endeavors are distributed fairly, each contributor advances and remains committed to the collaboration.
That fundamental bargain, once responsible for creating unprecedented economic mobility and America’s middle class has, however, been broken. The real wages and diminished purchasing power of American workers has been stagnant for some time now. Conversely, America’s CEOs and star entrepreneurs have greatly benefited from rising salaries and capital gains spurred by rapidly rising productivity and the passage of regulations gained through asserting political influence.
Organized labor has not fared as well and has been steadily under attack. Shifts from a manufacturing to service economy have taken their toll on union membership. At its peak in the 1960s, nearly 35 percent of U.S. workers were unionized compared with about 12 percent today. In spite of stagnating wages and growing job insecurity, unions have not made headway in organizing workers in emerging industries.
Labor unions are now being vilified as obstructionists to economic growth. And states’ quest to attract new businesses has led to renewed efforts in passing right-to-work legislation. With the recent addition of Michigan, there are now 24 states with right-to-work legislation. National studies show that workers in these right-to-work states average about $1,500 less per year in wages than do those in states without such a law.
While proponents of right-to-work legislation say states come out economically stronger in the end, nothing about this legislation creates well-paying jobs or ensures safe working conditions. What it really does is undermine the standards that unions have worked so hard to secure for American workers.
John Dorrer is former acting commissioner and director of the Center for Workforce Research and Information at the Maine Department of Labor. He now works on issues of workforce development with Jobs for the Future in Boston. Luisa S. Deprez is professor of sociology and women and gender studies at the University of Southern Maine. Both are members of Maine Regional Network, part of the Scholars Strategy Network, which brings together scholars across the country to address public challenges and their policy implications.



Bent over, thats what you get with Unions.
Really? I see it the opposite. I see that people who don’t have unions are more likely to get bent over. I know that my employer wouldn’t be paying me as much as I am getting if it weren’t for the union.
Why wouldn’t your employer pay you as much?
Aren’t you worth it?
Educate yourself on how Walmart treats it’s employees and you can answer your own question.
Educate yourself on how Walmart treats it’s employees and you can answer your own question.
Do you really need to ask that question? Do you really believe that all employees everywhere in this country are paid the amount that they are worth?
“Do you really believe that all employees everywhere in this country are paid the amount that they are worth?”
If employees were paid the value of what they actually produce then there would be nothing left for the middleman – aka the capitalizt.
No.
Many are overpaid.
What world are you living in? Do you think everything is okay? Do you think that everyone should just clam up and not do a thing to make their lives better?
No employer ever pays any employee their true worth. It’s the dirty secret of capitalizm.
And union folks often believe themselves worth more than they truly are. It’s the open “secret” of unionism.
You’re both right of course. Excesses in either direction is bad. :D
I’m surprised that you would make such a sweeping generalization.
Yeah, that whole 5 day, 40 hour workweek sure feels like getting bent over compared with the old 72 workweek. Worker’s Comp and Unemployment Compensation are defintely worse than a prostate exam.
The weekend – brought to you by the Labor Movement.
Unions were needed back then, but are no longer required.
Yeah. Everything is perfectly hunky-dory now.
Everything is fine now because the last four decades really haven’t displayed a steady decline in labor rights?
A persons job is not contingent on paying for a Sam’s club membership and that’s the difference.
One knows the union situation before he or she accepts the job. He or she doesn’t have to take the job, so it’s not like it’s being forced on the person. It is very much like a free ride for those persons who choose to accept a job where there is a union but do not pay for the privilege of enjoying all the benefits the union has fought for and won for the employees.
The writer made a poor analogy. That is not my fault.
But your lack of critical thinking skills is entirely your fault.
As are yours.
A non-Union worker should not get those benefits. The employer should have to negotiate independently with the worker. If that isn’t the law, it needs to be fixed. I’m in favor of real right-to-work laws because I don’t believe in forcing people to join anything. However, I also believe people have the right to make a bad decision and if they want to deal with a corporation on their own: more power to them.
Actually this is not the case. I entered into employment with a white collar job at an out-of-state University, moved my family, showed up first day to find out that I owed the union over $70 a month… I received that job using skills I learned from non-union employment. The health “benefits” where cheaper, but I also pay $40/month for parking on campus so it evened out. Since I’ve been employed I’ve not received additional training to further my development except from my own money and desire to do so. Additionally every year I have worked, the union has bargained away benefits that I had when I started. Also our salary increases are not based on merit and instead a flat rate so that both mediocre and excellent employees receive the same sub-inflation raises.
So not everyone knows they are in a “union situation” before they start. Also the since I have not gained anything from paying my dues, I’d be happy to be given the option. This is about proving to employees that you provide a product worth purchasing. At this time if I had a choice, I’d be asking for a refund.
It sounds like your job was a union job and you didn’t do enough research to find that out. I doubt they hid that fact from you.
My experience is that the more people who join the union, the more powerful that union is. When you have people who don’t give a damn and are happy with the crumbs they get, then you’re going to have a union that isn’t able to do as much as they can.
There is currently a trend happening in this country where employers are taking an aggressive stance in the personal lives of their employees. While I have often stated that Americans need to do more to be more healthy, I disagree with the idea of employers forcing their employees into joining wellness programs. Wellness programs are great for those who want them, but others think that their health issues are better discussed with their doctor and not with a third party hired by the employer. Others feel that they don’t want their health information put into another database. Others just want to be left alone to do their job. However, some employers are financially penalizing their employees for not joining and this is just the beginning. There are devices that are being marketed to wellness programs that will track the movements of employees to see how sedentary they are. What else is coming? And this all appears to be legal. I know that I can count on my union to help protect me from such invasive policies of my employer. Who else is going to do that?
Interesting comment Cheescake. There are those among us, myself included, who believe that shopping at Sam’s Club or WalMart will eventually cost you your job. When you buy products made in China, you put Chinese workers to work. When you buy products made in America, you put Americans to work. And vice versa. Thereby making your job contingent on NOT shopping there.
You also pour more American dollars into China and help support a Communist government that is NOT an ally of ours.
I don’t know if I would file them under “best friends”, though much of the anti-Chinese sentiment in this country is a leftover from the Cold war era, not reality. They are increasingly becoming more and more capitalistic – they are not a purely communist country and by no means an enemy either.
Our relationship is after all reciprocal. Though some could certainly argue that China is getting the better end of the bargain. Do we dictate terms to them, or do they dictate terms to us? It certainly started as the former, though more and more we’re slipping towards the latter.
So while I think Mr anti-walmart has his points – we need to get things back in balance and start making things, and not just being consumers – a complete reversal is not only unrealistic, but probably not in our best interest.
Trade and interdependence is often the best diplomat and barrier against war.
So, if everyone stopped paying Sam’s club membership nobody would lose their job?
I’m sure that if forced representation of non-members is that much of a problem for unions, organized labor’s Democratic friends in Congress will be happy to rewrite the law to relieve them of the burden. The Republicans will be even happier.
Problem solved.
I think that is totally appropriate. Only those who pay Union dues should get the benefit of collective bargaining and Union representation. If you don’t join, you’re on your own. Only fair.
I don’t know all the details of the various “right to work” laws, but if any of them compel the Union to bargain on behalf of a non-union worker, I wholeheartedly disagree. The law should be clear and compel employers to negotiate with each group separately.
I actually abhor forced collective bargaining in principle, but it sounds like the laws are very poorly written: they need to be adjusted to be fair to both sides.
They aren’t ‘poorly written’, they’re deliberately written that way to give unions an excuse for forcing workers into closed shops.
Ironic that Sam’s club is being used as an example, though. The Wal-mart family of companies aren’t exactly union-friendly. I’m sure that many of their employees feel like Sam’s and Wal-mart are bending them over.
Anyone who shops at either place is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Buy local, buy American.
Your statement brings to mind the old days of the Soviet Union when people only were allowed to drive the clunky old cars, use the clunky old TVs, washing machines and refrigerators, eat the potatoes and drink the vodka (much, much vodka) made in the USSR exclusively.
Oh, for the good old days, eh komrade?
How quickly we forget.
Nice comparison. Fine American made products and Russian junk. Speaking of Komrades, where did your Christmas booty from WalMart come from? COMMUNIST China, that is where. Thank you for making it a Merry Christmas for the People’s Republic of China and the greedy Walton brats. We chose to support America this year by buying American.
Jealousy is a very degrading disease.
You should get that checked out, komrade.
How in the world you got jealousy out of my last reply is mystifying, at best. I am sure it was the best you could do and I guess you deserve a star for trying. You know how it is these days. Everyone gets a trophy. Keep buying the Chinese crap and stabbing your fellow American in the back. It’s cheaper.
Maybe to your mind, but to most other Americans it brings to mind the old days of the USA when people worked in factories that made the appliances and products that we all bought and used as well as exported to the rest of the world.
Yes, the good old days….
There is a reason they are called the “old days.” You should probably figure out how to live in the here and now. The way things were in 1956 doesn’t put food on the table today.
The One at the white house is who puts the food on the table for most now.
No need to work, at least, not very hard.
I was a little surprised to see you still here after the elections. I figured you for one of the ones that threatened to move if Obama was re-elected. It was nice of you to stay and support the president.
I know that when my boyfriend and I have our wedding, we will do everything we can to make sure everything is American made and locally grown. And, since we are both union men, we’ll be sure to have as many union-made items as we can, too.
SEIU
Might have known.
You know what they say when you assume.
You make it sound as if the way we used to do things isn’t a good way anymore because it isn’t here and now. Yes, I am living in the here and now and the reality of here and now is that if the workers don’t work together then they will see their working conditions deteriorate to the lowest legal limit.
The here and now of today is also putting Chinese citizens to work doing things that we used to do. That isn’t putting food on the table of a lot of people here and now today.
Once again Cheesecake, you have nailed it. The old days are gone and we all need to learn how to live in the new days. We need to get rid of all the old axioms like “An honest day’s work, for an honest day’s pay”. That one is gone. Or, “Buy American, the job you save may be your own”. That one is gone too. We need to focus on new axioms like “Any job is better than no job”, or “Your lucky to even have a job, never mind what it pays”. There was one other thing that we used to say in the “old days”. The American dream. Well, that is gone too for many. Apparently, the financial success of a couple of hundred “Americans” is more important than the good of the country. That is the new way.
And what, pray tell, happened?
Yes-another interesting point to this. I choose to never shop at either place for so many reasons-local jobs, American-made goods, treatment of workers, etc.
Exactly. Very well said.
American workers represented by unions have priced themselves out of their jobs to the extent that goods can be made elsewhere and shipped thousands of miles to their customers.
How screwed up is that?
“American workers represented by unions have priced themselves out of their jobs to the extent that goods can be made elsewhere and shipped thousands of miles to their customers.”
This is possible because of externalized costs in energy markets not because workers wages are too high.
Yeah-it’s screwed up that we want more than the few dollars a day American companies are paying workers in other countries to make the same products.
You are not compelled to have membership at Sam’s Club. If you don’t have a membership you do not loose your job. Your membership dues do not get used for a “political action” agenda. Unfortunately you end up being allied with someone like Bill Clinton who signed NAFTA into law. Then there are the job security rules you know, like having a fireman on a diesel locomotive at full wages and benefits for years after they were no longer needed. Will the world end as labor advocates claim if more states pass right to work laws? Stay tuned!
And in Maine, you don’t lose your job if you don’t pay the dues, either. So, maybe it is a better analogy then you think.
Again, people take these jobs knowing what the deal with the unions is.
Ah yes, picking on those Rolls Royce driving free loaders over at the railroad. No target is too soft when you are shooting at a union. “Right to Starve” states have lower wages, lower benefits, and the owners are able to hoard much, much larger piles of cash. We will see more “Right to Starve” states in the future. The sheep spook easy.
Maybe union leadership should focus more attention on member satisfaction and retention than on compelling non-members to pay into the union. Labor unions have been instrumental in improving the collective lot of all workers, without question. Unfortunately, their leadership’s current strategies focus on external threats when the real threat is internal. Better, more principled leaders, are needed if labor unions are to survive and to continue to add value to their members’ work lives.
I think this is a good analogy. It’s pretty easy to understand that membership=benefits and vice versa. Maybe someone knows the answer to this question: for the workers who don’t pay dues, do they become employees-at-will unprotected by the union as such? In which case the employer would be under no obligation to provide equal benefits?
A list of ignorant beliefs about unions.
Agency fees are spent on politics…………..A lie, not legal.
You can be forced to join a union……………Not since 1947.
Union wages are too high………..Not unless you will work for Chinese wages.
Being a leech, a parasite is OK if you leech off Union members…Like freeloaders?
Don’t need Unions any more……………Go work for Wal Mart. Still agree?
Try working for Foxconn in China…..
And for the guy who took the job and was surprised it was a Union job. He should be glad he doesn’t have to negotiate his own pay since he didn’t have the capability to research his own job, or find a better one since.