Union Leadership’s True Agenda

A recent True North Reports article pulls the curtain back a bit on the true motives of union leadership.  The article focused on the American Federation of Teacher’s efforts to herd Vermont childcare workers into a union whether they wanted to go or not.  Of course the image presented is that all this is being done for the benefit of the workers.  That, of course, is what unions are perceived to be all about.  There once may have been a time when that was true, but there is reason to question whether it still is.

In the name of worker’s rights, union leaders use rank and file members of the work force as pawns to advance their own utopian political schemes.  According to the True North Reports article:

Here in Vermont, the AFT is using a study done by the pro-childcare provider union National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) to illustrate the “need” for childcare workers to unionize. (The Center’s website has a section about their “agenda” for “high-quality child care.”)

On page three of this “study”, under the title of “New Models of Unionism”, one finds the following by Steve Herzenberg, Labor Economist Executive Director of Keystone Research Center in Pennsylvania:

“Post-New Deal, the next new model for an egalitarian social structure can only come about with a new upsurge of unionism, and union organizing in low-wage industries must be a central feature.”

It is clear that he sees the purpose of unionizing as the creation of a post-New Deal model of an “egalitarian social structure”.  What if his idea of such a social structure does not raise the living standards of the average workers when it is taken from the theoretical dreaming of academics and actually put into place in the real world?  Did the workers in whose name unionizing is taking place, get surveyed to see if they agreed with this as the purpose of unionizing?  Most likely not, as they are seen as mere pawns in the scheme of would be social engineers.  Workers who spend most of their time pursuing practical pursuits are not likely to be committed to an abstract theory that has never worked whenever it was tried in the real world.