The Benefits of a Union
Dalton Nolan
7/22/2024
The owning class is terrified of workers unionizing—why else do they do and say anything and everything to prevent their workers from organizing? The union-busting playbook is long and filled to the brim with a variety of tactics, from outright intimidation (e.g., holding captive audience meetings and threatening terminations) to spreading lies about unions (“They only want your money!”). One particularly deceptive method of union-busting is to “butter up” the workers by providing them numerous benefits—in reality, really just token crumbs—to prove the “goodness” and “concern” of the company for its wage slaves; in reality, of course, these meager benefits offered are bribes to persuade the workers to reject the idea of organizing. When a company starts offering additional scraps to quash an organizing effort, one must ask themselves why: why is the company suddenly showing “care” and “concern” once the idea of a union is mentioned?
The answer is simple: the owning class fears the power of a union and the benefits it can bring to an organized workforce. Everyone knows that unions provide better wages, improved workplace conditions, and more time off, but these represent only a small part of what organizing can do for workers. Other benefits, often not discussed, constitute even more impactful and valuable assets to workers.
Our current economic ordering is a dictatorship wherein the boss holds nearly all of the power over the workers. Workers do not have a say in the affairs of the company, despite providing all of the labor which creates the product and makes the business run. Within the system, non-union workers are forced to individually negotiate the terms of their exploitation with their exploiter (though most workers do not have much of an opportunity for “negotiations,” of course, but must simply settle for the starvation wages offered). This creates an unequal and unfair dynamic in the workplace. Most of our readers, I’m sure, have been in the situation where they find out that a coworker, doing the same job as them, is paid more or less than themselves. This is done intentionally, not just to maximize profits by paying a worker less here and there, but also to sow discord among workers as they bicker over who is paid a dollar more or less an hour.
In contrast, being unionized provides the key benefit of collective bargaining. This process, while imperfect as it does not entirely “level the playing field,” does offer workers a level of power in negotiating the terms of their employment. Through collective bargaining, workers are allowed “a seat at the table”—the ability to sit across from their exploiter as a unified workforce—to voice their demands for better pay, improved working conditions, and enhanced benefits. The result of this process of collective bargaining is a contract: a legally binding agreement between the workers and the boss that dictates the new terms of employment.
The ethos of our present economic system is profit maximization. Under the boot of the owning class, workers are forcibly pushed to the physical and mental limit toward generating ever greater profits for the bosses. In this dynamic, the concerns of the workers have no place in the workplace. Worse, as long as management squeezes every bit of profit from the workers, the bosses couldn’t care less what management does to the workers. As such, in non-unionized workplaces, all manner of intimidation, bigotry, harassment, etc., is tolerated and encouraged if it reaps the bosses more profit. Moreover, without a means of protection against the actions of management, all workers in a non-unionized workplace are under constant threat of unjust termination, especially in “At Will” states, in which the bosses can fire workers without just cause and without giving a reason for the termination. Unjust terminations also harm other workers because a smaller workforce at a workplace means fewer workers that need to be paid to do the “same” amount of labor that a more appropriately staffed workplace can do, resulting in the workforce being exploited even more so. Without a means of protecting workers from the actions of bosses and management, the workers are forced into an even more exploitative and oppressive work environment than the workplace already is.
Without a union, some employees, at management's behest, may turn to their workplace's Human Resources (HR) department, hoping that this department’s appealing name implies that it serves the interests of the workers. This hope shatters when workers realize that no matter how many complaints they make, HR never takes the fight to the bosses, and this is by design. HR departments benefit the company by keeping worker agitation down by offering a place for the workers to “rant.” When the worker finishes filing their complaint, the file is tucked away while the worker is told to return to work with no plan on HR’s part to address the matter. Therefore, in a non-unionized workplace, the workers have nowhere to turn to deal with their issues. As such, workers have only two options: 1. continue working at the workplace and just accept the abuse management inflicts upon them, or 2. quit and find work elsewhere. Neither of these two options are desirable, as taking the abuse harms the worker, while quitting places the worker in the precarious situation of being unemployed.
In contrast, being unionized provides workers with the vital benefit of a grievance process, protecting them from management's unjust actions and holding them accountable. With a clearly defined grievance process, workers have a clear and direct path to voice their concerns, which results in the issue being addressed. Through the grievance process, workers can enforce the terms of the contract, fight against the unjust actions of management, and, most importantly, challenge unjust terminations by management. By upholding the terms of the contract, the grievance process reinforces the power of the contract and keeps the company from attempting to curtail article provisions and, thereby, weaken the union. By fighting management’s unjust actions, the grievance process makes interactions between management and workers far more moderated, as any anti-worker actions (e.g., racism or intimidation) on management’s part becomes a grievable offense that they can be punished for. By challenging unjust terminations, the grievance process provides job security and keeps the workplace more properly staffed. In all this, the grievance process builds confidence among the workers by giving them a weapon to fight back against management’s unjust actions, aiding in tipping the balance of power in the workplace, even if only slightly. Through this building of confidence, the workers can begin to develop class consciousness, giving them the strength to fight the bosses more aggressively for working class interests.
Under the present economic system, the owning class holds a monopoly on power. With society built for and geared toward their interests, the owning class has immense power, but they aren’t invincible. If the working class unites as a class, they represent a direct threat to the status quo of exploitation and oppression, and the bosses understand this. As such, the owning class will do anything to divide and isolate workers from one another as much as possible. With workers isolated from one another, they are severely disempowered as no single worker can take on the bosses to fight for an entire workplace, as they can be easily pushed aside or replaced by management.
In non-unionized workplaces, with the workers divided, every worker is on their own; there is no one looking out for you, no one to answer your questions, no one to address your concerns about the workplace, and no one to stand by your side when face-to-face with management and under threat of disciplinary action. And since management and the bosses have nearly all the power in the workplace, a non-unionized workplace remains dominated by them, as no individual worker wants to risk their livelihood to fight back.
In a unionized workplace, the workers don’t have to fear fighting back against the bosses alone, as they have the benefit of the entire union backing them up, represented most by a union steward who is fighting for them on a daily basis. Union stewards are an invaluable resource in enforcing the contract, holding management accountable, and strengthening worker power in the workplace. What is even more important is that union stewards are fellow workers in the workplace; along with their tasks as union stewards, they are also doing the same jobs that the rest of the workforce is doing, making them relatable to the average worker as they are fully aware of the struggles the workers are dealing with. As a fellow worker, union stewards are responsible for fighting for each and every worker on each and every issue. Union stewards are the ones you turn to when you have a question about the contract, the ones you file a grievance with, and the ones you rely on to be by your side in every single struggle.
The role of a union steward as your biggest advocate and fighter is most apparent when dealing with management face-to-face. If a worker is ever brought in for an investigatory interview that may lead to disciplinary action, they can invoke their Weingarten’s Rights, demanding the presence of a union steward during this meeting. At this meeting, the union steward will act like the worker's attorney by taking them aside to talk before the meeting begins, giving the worker advice on how to answer questions, requesting management to clarify a question, etc. In these situations, the union stewards protect the worker from deceptive tactics management may employ to force a worker to self-incriminate and, thereby, give them “just cause” to punish them.
As stated and demonstrated throughout the article, the workplace is a dictatorship in which the majority working class does not have a say on how the local workplace, let alone a company, operates. In this situation, the minority owning class has all the power to determine how the company is structured, what employees' benefits are and how they are distributed, how long the work schedule will be, and so forth. Despite not working themselves, the owning class has the final say on everything. What is even more undemocratic about companies is that many of the people who have the power to shape company policy aren’t even people who have worked at the company, but are shareholders or distant, disconnected board members.
It is in a non-unionized workplace that the dictatorship of the owning class is most severe and most apparent. As detailed in the previous paragraphs, the workers have no say on anything, no power to dictate workplace conditions, and definitely no power to even protect themselves or their livelihoods from the bosses mad dash to greater levels of profit. Inside the workplace, the supervisor is empowered to serve the interests of the owning class, making them the watchdogs and enforcers of the will of the owning class. As enforcers of the owning class’s will, supervisors' only mission is to ensure “business as usual”—the continued production of profit for the bosses. To this end, non-unionized workers are subjected to and forced to obey the mantra of “The Right of Management to Manage,” meaning that they must concede all ideas of worker control and power over the workplace to management if they wish to keep their jobs. In this, a non-unionized workplace is the most blatant expression of exploitation and oppression under our present economic system, and it is what the owning class fights desperately to maintain, as they hold the most power and earn the most profit from a weak, disorganized, and isolated collection of individual workers.
In contrast, a unionized workplace offers the workers more democratic control over the workplace and the power to influence and demand how the company operates. Though a unionized workplace is still undemocratic, with management and bosses still having overwhelming power over the workplace, the union provides the workers the means to challenge the undemocratic nature of the workplace under our present economic system. By providing workers the power to collectively bargain, the power of the grievance process, the power of a union steward, and more, the union challenges the dictatorship of the workplace. In opposition to “The Right of Management to Manage,” a unionized workplace puts forward and fights for “The Right of Workers to Self-Determination,” recognizing that as the ones whose labor makes the entire company function, they deserve greater and greater authority in the affairs of the company, especially as they relate to the well-being of the workers.
By its nature, our present economic system grinds us all down into nothing for the sole benefit of the owning class. From our suffering, the owning class profits handsomely. Some workers will recognize this inherent truth, others will not. Nonetheless, the sheer agony that working people suffer on a daily basis because of this economic system builds up over time, forming into a righteous anger that seeks only one thing: to fight back. However, this righteous anger in a non-unionized workplace is tempered by the absence of a union. With no union, there is nothing that binds the workers together, leading to the workers seeing each other not as members of an exploited and oppressed group, but as individuals. Once each worker is isolated from one another, the immense scope, size, and power of the bosses hangs over them, reminding them how weak they individually are against the bosses. In this isolation from one another, the anger that workers feel toward their workplace conditions is easily manipulated by the bosses, who deliberately direct the workers’ anger away from themselves toward other workers. In doing this, the bosses stoke division and animosity between workers, such as between the supposedly “lazy” workers and “hardworking” workers, resulting in them focusing on each other rather than the ones who create and propagate their suffering: the bosses. From all this, there is less inclination to fight back against the bosses, a reluctant acceptance of the status quo, and, most harmfully, an obstacle to displays of solidarity and the formation of class consciousness.
In a unionized workplace, solidarity and class consciousness are intrinsically tied to the union. When workers band together and proclaim their desire to form a union, they are stating in no uncertain terms that they not only understand that each of them is exploited and oppressed by the bosses, but that they are united together as workers in opposition to the bosses. In this, the union builds bridges of solidarity between each and every worker, helping form a shared sense of identity and connection with one another. From this, an infantile form of class consciousness takes root within the union and the workers, who recognize that their interests as workers at a company are in direct conflict with the owners and the management of this company. With every instance of intense collective bargaining, with every filed grievance, with every meeting between the union steward and the workers, and with every victory in chipping away at the dictatorship of the workplace, the class consciousness of the union and the workers mature, developing further and further. At the end of this stage of development, the class consciousness of the union and workers now recognizes that they are members of the working class locked in a bitter class struggle against the owning class—a class struggle between a force of liberation and a force of exploitation and oppression. The building and continual development of solidarity and class consciousness is the ultimate benefit a union provides its members. It is through solidarity and class consciousness that the workers are given the hope for a better future, the confidence to fight back against the injustice inflicted upon them by the owning class, and the power to struggle for the liberation of all working people of all backgrounds and identities.
As Billy Bragg once said, “There is power in a union”—a power that can lead to liberation and peace for the working class.
