In America we have anti-trust laws that prohibit companies, in part, from uniting together and setting pricing on goods and services. The government feels this gives merchants an unfair advantage when supplying it's customers, as they can demand inflated price gouging to the consumer. The anti-trust laws also prohibit large companies from buying up the competition and cornering the market, again there by controlling the market.
So why is it so critical that business remain independent and kept in check, but the labor force is not? How does the same principle not apply to unionization of the work force? Doesn't that fix the price of labor to the employer? Do they not collude to collectively bargain, and hold an employer ransom for collective entitlements and pay?
Some would argue that unionization serves the working class by bartering for worker's rights, and better working conditions. Well, we have a minimum wage law, we have a whole government agency devoted to safety in the work place,(OSHA), we have child labor laws, and we have federal guidelines to ensure overtime is paid is the standard workweek is extended. All this is reinforced by a contingency of lawyers eager to sue anyone who violates those statutes. So what does the union do but collect dues and use that money to influence elections?
Unions enjoy a unique monopolistic power over many aspects of the economy. This has been achieved by legislation which has forced men to join these unions, enacted by those same politicians who were indebted to the union for influencing their election outcomes, forcing both the employees and the employers to deal with these unions whether they wished to or not.
Non unionized workers enjoy the same steady rise in wages as their union counterparts, because it is in the economic self interest of employers to keep seasoned trained employees, rather than allow the competition to gobble them up. Those same workers are forced to subsidize the unjustifiably high wages of the union workers unacknowledged victims of the unions "social gains." Case in point, the Federal Government union employees.
Needless to say, men have the right to organize into unions, provided they do so voluntarily, so no one is forced to join. Unions can have value as a fraternal organization, as a means of keeping members informed of current market conditions, and effectively training skilled labor to new updates in their craft. But to say the unions cause a general rise in the standard of living is a myth, started by, you guessed it, the unions!
Unemployment is the inevitable result of forcing wage rates above their free market level. Again just look to the teacher's union, when faced with taking cuts or laying off workers, they opted for laying off workers. How does that serve the teachers? It's nothing but self serving to the bureaucrats who sponge off the union dues.