Just Why Are The Unions Supporting A Rise In The Minimum Wage?
The standard economic analysis of unions states they they do exactly what they say on the tin. They work for the benefit of unions members and that's it. Unions do not work for the greater good of the country, for the working man in general but solely for those who pay their union dues. Just as with corporations we see them as being entirely self-interested organizations. Which leads us into something of a problem for the current fights and campaigns to secure a substantial rise in the minimum wage seem to be largely union backed. The Fight for $15 for example seems to be largely backed by the SEIU. And yet there's almost no SEIU members in the fast food industry (given the industry structure of being largely run at ground level by franchisees, there wouldn't be) and it's most unlikely that, given that industry structure, there ever would be.
[clip]
The progenitor of this idea that union contracts contain links to minimum wage rises is another sometime colleague here, Richard Berman. he explains this in the WSJ:
A small note of caution, it wouldn't be fair to say that Berman is a disinterested and impartial observer here, he's very much on one side of the battle. Weight his remarks the same way you would, but in a different direction, those from a union leaning outfit like the EPI, or possibly even something from the SEIU or the Fight for $15 themselves.
However, it is a fascinating suggestion as to what the economic incentives are here. Economists are a suspicious lot and tend to think that people are motivated by their (enlightened) self interest. Given that there's almost no union members making minimum wage (the average union wage is up at $22 an hour or so) then why are unions backing this idea of a substantial rise in the minimum wage? A reasonable answer could indeed be that union contracts contain upgrades to current union pay levels if that minimum wage rises. Sadly, as Berman himself notes, we don't actually have a good publicly available database of all union contracts so we can only infer from those few that can indeed be seen.
The standard economic analysis of unions states they they do exactly what they say on the tin. They work for the benefit of unions members and that's it. Unions do not work for the greater good of the country, for the working man in general but solely for those who pay their union dues. Just as with corporations we see them as being entirely self-interested organizations. Which leads us into something of a problem for the current fights and campaigns to secure a substantial rise in the minimum wage seem to be largely union backed. The Fight for $15 for example seems to be largely backed by the SEIU. And yet there's almost no SEIU members in the fast food industry (given the industry structure of being largely run at ground level by franchisees, there wouldn't be) and it's most unlikely that, given that industry structure, there ever would be.
[clip]
The progenitor of this idea that union contracts contain links to minimum wage rises is another sometime colleague here, Richard Berman. he explains this in the WSJ:
Organized labor's instantaneous support for President Obama's recent proposal to hike the minimum wage doesn't make much sense at first glance. The average private-sector union member—at least one who still has a job—earns $22 an hour according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That's a far cry from the current $7.25 per hour federal minimum wage, or the $9 per hour the president has proposed. Altruistic solidarity with lower-paid workers isn't the reason for organized labor's cheerleading, either.
The real reason is that some unions and their members directly benefit from minimum wage increases—even when nary a union member actually makes the minimum wage.
The Center for Union Facts analyzed collective-bargaining agreements obtained from the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards. The data indicate that a number of unions in the service, retail and hospitality industries peg their base-line wages to the minimum wage.
The real reason is that some unions and their members directly benefit from minimum wage increases—even when nary a union member actually makes the minimum wage.
The Center for Union Facts analyzed collective-bargaining agreements obtained from the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards. The data indicate that a number of unions in the service, retail and hospitality industries peg their base-line wages to the minimum wage.
A small note of caution, it wouldn't be fair to say that Berman is a disinterested and impartial observer here, he's very much on one side of the battle. Weight his remarks the same way you would, but in a different direction, those from a union leaning outfit like the EPI, or possibly even something from the SEIU or the Fight for $15 themselves.
However, it is a fascinating suggestion as to what the economic incentives are here. Economists are a suspicious lot and tend to think that people are motivated by their (enlightened) self interest. Given that there's almost no union members making minimum wage (the average union wage is up at $22 an hour or so) then why are unions backing this idea of a substantial rise in the minimum wage? A reasonable answer could indeed be that union contracts contain upgrades to current union pay levels if that minimum wage rises. Sadly, as Berman himself notes, we don't actually have a good publicly available database of all union contracts so we can only infer from those few that can indeed be seen.