Quote:

Figures released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the combined rate of private- and public-sector union membership was 11.1% last year, down from 11.3% the prior year. Membership in the private sector fell to a rate of 6.6% in 2014, from 6.7%, while public-sector representation rose slightly to 35.7%, from 35.3%.

Unions managed to collectively add about 41,000 members in the private sector, led by industries such as construction and leisure and hospitality, but it wasn’t enough to keep pace with total private-sector employment, said John Schmitt, a senior economist at the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research.

“The overall workforce is growing faster than the union workforce,” said Mr. Schmitt, who said unions gained members in part because of workers who got new jobs in unionized facilities.

“It’s bad news for the labor movement because it shows that they are not able to rebound. Essentially, they look like they’re stuck,” said Gary Chaison, a professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.

Union membership rates declined over the year in 27 states and the District of Columbia. They rose in 18 states and were unchanged in five.

Michigan, a traditionally heavily unionized state at a center of U.S. manufacturing, underscores the labor movement’s challenge to rebuild in a changing economy. It fell to the 11th-most unionized state last year from the seventh the year before, dropping out of the top 10 category, where it had long held a place.

The membership rate in the public sector was once a bright spot for union growth, but has taken a hit in recent years amid the sector’s employment declines in cash-strapped states. Unions added a net of roughly 8,000 members, driven by gains at the local levels, primarily teachers. State-level membership saw big declines.

Overall, 7.2 million employees in the public sector belonged to a union last year, compared with 7.4 million employees in the private sector. The 14.6 million total was “little different” from 2013, according to Friday’s government report.

In 1983, the first year for which comparable data are available, there were 17.7 million union workers, and the rate was 20.1%.

William Spriggs, the chief economist for the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest union federation, was upbeat about the report. Despite “efforts to limit public-sector unions, membership numbers and union density grew,” he said, referring to Republican initiatives to scale back collective bargaining rights at state levels. “Despite the numbers being flat, the labor movement continued to be important,” Mr. Spriggs said.

Others said that Friday’s figures reflected a growing inability of unions to attract members in a changing employment landscape.

“They don’t know how to design their appeals to a changing workforce,” said Mr. Chaison at Clark University. “They’ll complain about employer opposition, but employer opposition has always been there,” he said.

U.S. Labor Secretary Thomas Perez used the report to promote the utility of unions in narrowing income inequality.

The report “confirms what we’ve always known: that belonging to a union makes a powerful difference in people’s lives,” said Mr. Perez, who cited data showing unionized workers have median weekly earnings of $970 compared with $763 for workers not in a union.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/membersh...014-1422028558

(01-26-2015 08:09 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Thus the push to organize unskilled fast food workers. If the gubment ever gets minimum wages to $15/hr. or $40k per year there are a lot of college educated people (teachers, social workers, etc) that make less in their vocation of choice that would switch to minimum wage jobs, or their pay scale would have to increase. So, instead of elevating unskilled worker incomes above the poverty level inflation would cause a market correction and they'll quickly be making $15/hr and be below the poverty level.

(01-26-2015 09:05 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 08:09 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Thus the push to organize unskilled fast food workers. If the gubment ever gets minimum wages to $15/hr. or $40k per year there are a lot of college educated people (teachers, social workers, etc) that make less in their vocation of choice that would switch to minimum wage jobs, or their pay scale would have to increase. So, instead of elevating unskilled worker incomes above the poverty level inflation would cause a market correction and they'll quickly be making $15/hr and be below the poverty level.

Less than 2% of the people making minimum wage provide the primary financial support for their family. Most people making minimum wage are kids, the elderly, or a spouse making a second income.

Dems make it sound like the bottom 50% of Americans are supporting a family of four with one minimum wage salary.

Quote:Figures released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the combined rate of private- and public-sector union membership was 11.1% last year, down from 11.3% the prior year. Membership in the private sector fell to a rate of 6.6% in 2014, from 6.7%, while public-sector representation rose slightly to 35.7%, from 35.3%.

(01-27-2015 12:39 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:Figures released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the combined rate of private- and public-sector union membership was 11.1% last year, down from 11.3% the prior year. Membership in the private sector fell to a rate of 6.6% in 2014, from 6.7%, while public-sector representation rose slightly to 35.7%, from 35.3%.

If those two categories (people who work in the private-sector, and people who work for the government) could be shown separately, the utter *Collapse* of private-sector union membership since its peak in the 1950s would be startling to see.

(01-26-2015 04:48 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  People are finally realizing that their best chance to control their own ability to make money, earn promotions, and so on is to not allow a union to control it for them. In a union environment the best employee in the world ain't worth squat, especially if he's new and has no seniority. Why would a young kid who's a hard worker want any part of that?

Quote:

Figures released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the combined rate of private- and public-sector union membership was 11.1% last year, down from 11.3% the prior year. Membership in the private sector fell to a rate of 6.6% in 2014, from 6.7%, while public-sector representation rose slightly to 35.7%, from 35.3%.

Unions managed to collectively add about 41,000 members in the private sector, led by industries such as construction and leisure and hospitality, but it wasn’t enough to keep pace with total private-sector employment, said John Schmitt, a senior economist at the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research.

“The overall workforce is growing faster than the union workforce,” said Mr. Schmitt, who said unions gained members in part because of workers who got new jobs in unionized facilities.

“It’s bad news for the labor movement because it shows that they are not able to rebound. Essentially, they look like they’re stuck,” said Gary Chaison, a professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.

Union membership rates declined over the year in 27 states and the District of Columbia. They rose in 18 states and were unchanged in five.

Michigan, a traditionally heavily unionized state at a center of U.S. manufacturing, underscores the labor movement’s challenge to rebuild in a changing economy. It fell to the 11th-most unionized state last year from the seventh the year before, dropping out of the top 10 category, where it had long held a place.

The membership rate in the public sector was once a bright spot for union growth, but has taken a hit in recent years amid the sector’s employment declines in cash-strapped states. Unions added a net of roughly 8,000 members, driven by gains at the local levels, primarily teachers. State-level membership saw big declines.

Overall, 7.2 million employees in the public sector belonged to a union last year, compared with 7.4 million employees in the private sector. The 14.6 million total was “little different” from 2013, according to Friday’s government report.

In 1983, the first year for which comparable data are available, there were 17.7 million union workers, and the rate was 20.1%.

William Spriggs, the chief economist for the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest union federation, was upbeat about the report. Despite “efforts to limit public-sector unions, membership numbers and union density grew,” he said, referring to Republican initiatives to scale back collective bargaining rights at state levels. “Despite the numbers being flat, the labor movement continued to be important,” Mr. Spriggs said.

Others said that Friday’s figures reflected a growing inability of unions to attract members in a changing employment landscape.

“They don’t know how to design their appeals to a changing workforce,” said Mr. Chaison at Clark University. “They’ll complain about employer opposition, but employer opposition has always been there,” he said.

U.S. Labor Secretary Thomas Perez used the report to promote the utility of unions in narrowing income inequality.

The report “confirms what we’ve always known: that belonging to a union makes a powerful difference in people’s lives,” said Mr. Perez, who cited data showing unionized workers have median weekly earnings of $970 compared with $763 for workers not in a union.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/membersh...014-1422028558

(01-29-2015 10:37 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Ah. Makes perfect sense. I knew there was a reason wages have been stagnant or dropping over the years.

(01-30-2015 03:12 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  I'm just here so I won't get fined!!

(01-26-2015 09:05 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 08:09 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Thus the push to organize unskilled fast food workers. If the gubment ever gets minimum wages to $15/hr. or $40k per year there are a lot of college educated people (teachers, social workers, etc) that make less in their vocation of choice that would switch to minimum wage jobs, or their pay scale would have to increase. So, instead of elevating unskilled worker incomes above the poverty level inflation would cause a market correction and they'll quickly be making $15/hr and be below the poverty level.

Less than 2% of the people making minimum wage provide the primary financial support for their family. Most people making minimum wage are kids, the elderly, or a spouse making a second income.

Dems make it sound like the bottom 50% of Americans are supporting a family of four with one minimum wage salary.

(01-30-2015 11:37 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(01-29-2015 10:37 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Ah. Makes perfect sense. I knew there was a reason wages have been stagnant or dropping over the years.

So it has nothing to do with illegals undercutting American workers?

(01-31-2015 01:13 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(01-30-2015 03:12 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  I'm just here so I won't get fined!!

Hey Def, your schtick is getting as old as Fits Dabber-Jabber.