Study: Unions are Bad for Economic Growth

Reader Comments
Back to blog

This straight from the study:
"Despite an enormous literature that has documented numerous aspects of unions and their role in the labor market, the magnitude of a “average” effect of unions on firm performance throughout the economy remains somewhat unclear, as we argue below."

K. of CA 3:01AM July 18, 2010

Unions were formed to give the American worker a voice and to prevent companies from taking unfair of their employees. OSHA, 40 hour work weeks, lunch breaks, etc. are essentially from unions. Whereas, the 10% in abnormal returns may be accurate, the term "abnormal" here refers strictly to not normal returns that would otherwise go toward the companies profits. In other words, because there is a union, the 10% goes towards the companies employees instead of the pockets of the management. Now, if you support employers getting all the money and the American worker receiving less then the representation that "Unions are bad for Economic Growth" is completely accurate. And technically this is accurate, but a fairer statement would be "Unions are bad for Economic Growth but help the average American worker". A reading of the study in its entirety illustrates this to any fair minded person.

K of CA 2:56AM July 18, 2010

The need to cite number of years worked is very revealing. Whereas poor management can and is often fired for sub-par job performance, union workers get to keep their jobs based on seniority, not merit. How does that make sense? Jim, if union members are as great for companies as you say they are, they should be willing to subject themselves to job performance reviews regardless of seniority. Drop the entitlement mentality and back your talk up with some walk. In America we trade value for value. No one cares how many years you worked somewhere. If you're not doing your job TODAY, you're of no value to your employer and you should be fired. What's more, the longer you stay at the company not doing your job as well as the new guy, the more you cost the customer of your company when that widget you build is sold.

Chet of AL 8:41PM June 17, 2010

unions suck !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dddddddddddddd of MS 1:05PM May 27, 2010

I just don't see any sense in organizing more members when there is not enough work. What is the point to sit and wait for many months on the books, especially when your dues are valid?. If you can't work then your benefits and unemployment will run out. I totally think this union and non-union thing is just a big garbage. They are really the same entitle. The difference is that one side is right and the other side is left. Unfortunately the workers are usually the one that gets the short end of the deal. If workers were able to work and take care of each other, as they should, maybe things would have been better.

Mark of CA 11:41PM February 09, 2010

It sounds to me the author of this article point is,if unions are allowed to spread thruout american bussiness,It will drag down the value of stocks.I can only speak for my union,which I can proudly say I've been a member for 29yrs,If not for us union employess the company would have failed long ago.Most of us have been with the company for an average of 25yrs and know our jobs,while management has a life of 5yrs or so,mostly clueless and inept at best.Maybe my friend Jim Pethokoukis should rename this article:POOR MANAGEMENT IS BAD FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH.

Jim Morrison of MA 3:50AM February 10, 2009

One of the things that strikes me as odd is that the unions fail to accept the fact that they are contributors to the collapsing economic situation. Especially in the case of the auto industry. Never underestimate the power of denial --I guess. A pension & medical coverage are NOT rights. That's about as straight forward as the facts can be--like it or not. In both cases an individual should be able to receive service commensurate to the contribution. Anything thing else simply does not pencil out.

RJSIV of CA 1:58PM February 09, 2009

Couldn't be that all the work has gone out of our country because of high union wages, could it? Nah! Couldn't be that the greed of union leaders and ceo's have raised the saleries of union workers out of reach, could it? Nah! Couldn,t be Obama is from Illinois,a heavy union state could it, nah. Guess what labor group will profit from Obama's stimulus package, the union construction people, surprise, surprise. What is going to fix our economy, nothing, until greed is done away with, again, nothing.

John of AZ 1:14PM February 09, 2009

The title of the article says it all, "Unions Are Bad" period. Unions have done nothing but help destroy America and the thousands of unemployed members that falsely believed in them. We should have let the automakers and the UAW all go under and started over again. Look back in history, we've done it before.

Tom of MO 12:49PM February 09, 2009

Having worked in a service employee union as a high-schooler/college student, I dont have any particular love for unions, and don't think that the union I belonged to did a good job of representing its workers. The primary purpose of most unions appears to be to siphon funds away from workers to pay another set of executives and "shareholders", the union reps.
That said, the only time that a union enters a business is when the management is INCOPMETENT. Unionization can be seen as enforcing a new management paradign because internal management cannot successfully manage their company. In light of this, you should see stock prices fall when a company goes union, for two reasons: 1) yes, unions typically mean lower operating efficiency, and 2) this is a sign that management does not know how to successfully operate the company.
Companies and investors should remember this before blaming the unions.

Stuart of AR 11:32AM February 09, 2009