Critique Union Labor Relations

0 Comment

Article Critique: Union Labor Relations al Affiliation) In his article, ‘After the U.S. recovers, will unions?’ David Madland is of the opinion that labor unions are the backbone of the economy. He asserts that labor unions allow workers a chance to profit from economic gains that they contribute in creating. This leads to a situation where the American economy gains an inclusive aspect that is beneficial to all members of the society. He noted that the downfall of the economy affects greatly the rise and stature of labor unions. He is in full support of the Employee free choice Act as it guarantees an increase in the number of employees subscribing to labor unions. The increase in employees who join labor unions results in a subsequent rise in, their average income and a rise in the wage flow into the economical domain (Madland, 2009). His conclusion is that by all means, employees should join labor unions as it serves both economic and moral purposes.A couple of points in the author’s argument cannot be debated. They are logical, accurate, and reasonable. The assertion that sustainability can only occur if workers receive adequate rewards and get the freedom to buy their goods is correct. In a situation where the reverse occurs, workers feel cheated resulting in constant strikes, boycotts and go slows. This stalls economic development in the long term. Furthermore, the moral aspect of working ought to be fulfilled. it is not fair for those that build an economy to receive the least of its profits (Madland, 2009). The assertion that should the Employee Free Choice Act become legalized, union membership will have an increase is also of certainty. This validates union membership and strengthens their function, hence attracting membership.However, the author makes a point that cannot be validated. The assumption that unions always work to the good of an economy is the most doubtful of them all. If an economy becomes corrupted, then every sector in it malfunctions. Unions cannot be set aside from the malfunction that is within the United States economy. Unions in the modern day have become less accountable to the employees. There are certain moves and strategies made by labor unions that union members are not aware of and yet they are meant to protect their interests. The reason the number of unionized workers is much lower in the 21st century than it was in the 1950s is the lack of transparency. Union membership can be beneficial, but the author has exaggerated the impact it has on an economy.While unions benefit individual growth, their impact on the economy as a whole is very little. Developing countries like Nigeria and Kenya have abundance in Labor Unions. According to statistics, these labor unions have 96% transparency and accountability. If the author’s claims were true, then the two economies in question would not be developing but rather developed. Many other factors affect economic progress more than unionization. This substantiates the argument that unionization of workers does not in essence largely contribute to economic growth. If other aspects of development like demand amp. supply, production rates and resource allocation are not in check, the rate of unionization will do no good for an economy. Rather than focus on unionization as a singular aspect, the author should have discussed all these other aspects. On its own, unionization does little for economic progress.ReferenceMadland, D. (2009, February 4). Los Angeles Times Opinion. Retrieved January 24, 2015, from Los Angeles Times Website: 2009feb04-story.html#page=1