Judging Unions' Future Using a Historical Perspective: The Public Policy Choice Between Competition and Unionization
In this paper I look at unions' future using a historical perspective and focusing on the period of union ascendancy as well as the past few decades when unions have been in decline. We know trends currently in place are unfavorable to unions. What conditions would be favorable? The rise of unions from the 1930s through the early 1950s was due to the convergence of a number of events - an economic policy that attempted to restrict competition beginning in the 1930s, the twin beliefs that labor markets were inherently noncompetitive and/or that individual workplaces were exploitative, and low union premiums. The passage of highly favorable legislation, in the form of the Wagner Act, was a reflection of the idea that unions could actually improve the functioning of labor markets and serve as a countervailing power to big business. Over the past several decades, union density declined because government policy became pro-competitive, it became clearer that labor markets were relatively competitive, HR practices developed that reduced the amount of opportunistic behavior of employers, and unions increased the percentage premium they enjoyed in industries where rents were available. In this environment, the public-good aspect of labor unions - their ability to improve the functioning of labor markets - was called into question. The passage of amendments to the NLRA that were unfavorable to unions was a reflection of this changed sentiment as to the public good aspect of unions as well as to the adoption of pro-competitive market policies in general. Consequently the future trend in union density will depend on the competitiveness of the economy and on the related question of the number of opportunities for unions to fulfill their major goal of either extracting economic rents or remedying market failures that result in exploitative employment relationships.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Barry T. Hirsch & Robert A. Connolly, 1987. "Do unions capture monopoly profits?," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 41(1), pages 118-136, October.
- Clark, Kim B, 1984. "Unionization and Firm Performance: The Impact on Profits, Growth, and Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 893-919, December.
- Henry C. Simons, 1944. "Some Reflections on Syndicalism," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52, pages 1.
- Seymour Martin Lipset & Ivan Katchanovski, 2001. "The Future of Private Sector Unions in the U.S," Journal of Labor Research, Transaction Publishers, vol. 22(2), pages 229-244, April.
- Peter D. Linneman & Michael L. Wachter & William H. Carter, 1990. "Evaluating the evidence on union employment and wages," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 44(1), pages 34-53, October.
- James T. Bennett & Bruce E. Kaufman, 2001. "The Future of Private Sector Unionism in the U.S," Journal of Labor Research, Transaction Publishers, vol. 22(2), pages 227-228, April.
- Barry T. Hirsch & Edward J. Schumacher, 2001.
"Private Sector Union Density and the Wage Premium: Past, Present, and Future ,"
Journal of Labor Research,
Transaction Publishers, vol. 22(3), pages 487-518, July.
- Barry T. Hirsch & Edward J. Schumacher, 2000. "Private Sector Union Density and the Wage Premium: Past, Present, and Future," Working Papers 0015, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
- Barry T. Hirsch, 1991. "Labor Unions and the Economic Performance of Unions," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number luepf.
- Kaufman, Bruce E., 2003. "The organization of economic activity: insights from the institutional theory of John R. Commons," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 71-96, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bep:upennl:upenn_wps-1029. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.