Anti-labor laws and inferior public educational and training practices in the USAGerman governments' practices regarding labor organizations and vo

[Supposn]

Anti-labor laws and inferior public educational and training practices in the USA:

German governments' practices regarding labor organizations and vocational training are somewhat similar to many, (if not most) other Western European nations. Their labor organization representatives sit at tables where government policies are determined; government and labor unions cooperate to establish vocational training programs available to their nation's citizens. Those practices and policies contribute to better increasing the net incomes and purchasing powers of their wage-dependent families; thus, they're of net benefit to their nation's social and economic well-being.

The graduates of USA's public educational training systems are academically and vocationally inferior to those of many other nations. Any improvement of a nation's educational and training practices will no lesser improve the nation's social and economic well-being.

USA's federal and state governments' anti-labor policies and practices, and our lesser capable public-school graduates, are particularly net detrimental to families dependent upon wages; (these are among, if not the largest of USA's population segments). Thus, they're of great net detriment to our nation's social and economic well-being.

For examples, refer to WorldBest Education Systems (worldtop20.org)
and “Right-to-Work”States Still Have Lower Wages | Economic Policy Institute (epi.org)
Respectfully, Supposn

 

[DGS49]

There is no common law or other protection for the rights of workers to bargain collectively. Until passage of the National Labor Relations Act, employers could openly FIRE any employee who promoted unions or even was suspected of promoting a union in that workplace.

The NLRA changed all that in the U.S. It is ILLEGAL for an employer to fire someone for union activities (unless those activities take place in the workplace and interfere with the operations of the employer). If enough workers in a proposed bargaining unit sign cards indicating they want a union election, they can petition DoL for a representation election, and the employer cannot prevent it. If they win the representation election, the employer is required by law to "negotiate in good faith" over compensation, benefits, and working conditions, and if he refuses to do so, the DoL can impose sanctions to force the matter.

Like it or not, the vast majority of private sector employees are not sufficiently motivated to bargain collectively, and only about 10% or private sector workers are covered by a Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Unions in Europe (e.g., Germany, Austria, Scandanavia) are very much different from unions in the U.S. THOSE unions try to negotiate cooperatively with management, recognizing that if the enterprise fails, everyone loses. I personally know of a case where a German union worked with management to find a place in the company for an engineer who was technically incompetent. They created a position in HR for the guy and he thrived. American unions automatically take an adversarial position with management, not caring whether the company can operate efficiently with proposed work rules, not caring, it would appear, whether the company can even survive with the deal that they demand. The recent interactions between the UAW and the "Big Three" were a great example of this antagonistic union approach to bargaining.

This is even the case in the PUBLIC SECTOR (e.g., teachers' unions), where they unions simply don't GAF where the money will come from to meet their demands. The taxpayers (we) will provide funding, no problem, right?

I don't think this is a failure of American public education. The unions are simply corrupt and they ironically have a monopoly.