Trade unions help workers demand better work benefits and benefits, which is understandable in itself. Workers also have the right to enjoy a better life, which is correct!

But the problem is that the US trade union has deviated from the essence of the trade union and has become a gangster-like existence.

In the early days of the establishment of the union, the union was good. They helped workers get rid of the 12-hour working system every week and work 6 days a day. They helped them get the minimum wage standard, that is, the standard hourly wage must not be lower than the local standard living standard agreement.

It also prohibits discrimination against any workers within the enterprise, including those of people of color, etc., which are huge contributions.

To describe it vividly, it is to help all the high-tech employees of so-called high-tech companies get rid of 996 and bring them back to the normal era of 955.

The way for the union to win is to strike.

But gradually, the unions found that the factories were so afraid of strikes that they were willing to pay more amazing benefits.

For example, as long as the union leader finds a way to stop the strike or directly extinguish the next strike, the union leader can own an apartment in New York, where more than a dozen beautiful blondes live.

Or they directly reap a large amount of money, which is equivalent to the money that hundreds of workers earn for their whole lives. These things made all union leaders degenerate instantly. In order to maintain their position, they even gradually became gangsters.

In 1957, all the big gang leaders in the United States met in New York, and 22 of the 56 people present were union leaders. Isn’t it very funny?

So is it just the union leaders who are bad?

No, many workers are also broken. Generally speaking, people who join the trade union have to pay 5% of their income as membership dues.

But from then on, they can start a "carefree" work and life.

After becoming a member of the trade union, it is equivalent to having an iron job. Even if it should be eliminated, the company will not dare to fire it.

According to the actual footage taken in the internal documentary, the workers who joined the union were at work.

"Every day, I just come to play crossword games"

"Look at the video tapes brought by my colleagues or read newspapers, or just sit down."

"Some people even come to work in the office directly with their work from another company!"

But even so, these workers can still receive all wages and benefits, and they have actually become parasites parasites that are parasites in the factory.

If a worker can create profits for the company, they should receive corresponding rewards and benefits.

But if they don't create profits for the company but still enjoy all the benefits and compensation, isn't that equivalent to sucking the blood of other hard-working workers?

The most terrifying thing is that when many workers first entered the factory, they were very pure and hardworking, and were very happy to work hard for the company.

But when they see that some people don’t need to work hard, even if they lie for a day, they will earn the same amount of money, or even more.

These workers either left in anger or joined the union if they couldn't beat them, and joined the union like those workers, and then lived a wonderful life of lying down to work.

A few years later, professional journalists conducted interviews and calculations, and finally concluded that those workers who were in high benefits but were not in a position to invisibly increase the cost of each car by $1,200.

In 2007, the average annual salary of workers in General Motors in the United States was 141,000, Ford was 146,000, and Chrysler was 151,000. The average annual salary of workers in these three major automobile companies exceeded 140,000 US dollars, and the average annual salary of American university professors during the same period was 96,000 US dollars.

In order to maintain members' high wages, high benefits and jobs, auto unions do not allow American auto companies to reduce workers' welfare and may not allow them to lay off employees.

That's all, even business restructuring or introduction of new technologies carried out by various companies to improve efficiency and reduce costs are all prohibited by trade unions.

Not to mention the distance, just take the nearest ones as an example. Ford originally planned to introduce a new technology assembly line. This assembly line can increase work efficiency by more than 80%, but the workers needed only need 60%.

This obviously helps the company improve profits, but when Ford announced that it would launch this new production line, the union immediately organized all employees to strike. The reason is that if the work efficiency is improved by 80%, but the workers only need 60%, wouldn’t it mean that 80% of workers will be unemployed in the end (I don’t know how this 80% is calculated)?

In the end, Ford was forced to give up introducing this production line.

The same is true for electric vehicle technology, because electric vehicles are simpler and require fewer mechanical components. If electric vehicles are launched, it can also reduce employees by about 40%.

Then it was banned by the union's strike. American car companies do not support electric cars. It turned out that it was not because the leader was too stupid, but because the union was too bad.

Finally, there are layoffs. Through contracts signed by the union, General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, etc., if the company really has to lay off employees because of serious losses, the unemployed workers can also get 95% of their wages, the benefits remain unchanged and there is no time limit. Therefore, the work that one person could have done was needed at the Detroit factory at that time, and the efficiency was extremely inefficient.

From this perspective, which company dares to lay off employees unless it goes bankrupt... But it is not possible to go bankrupt. Didn't you see that the union is marching and demonstrating now, asking companies to ban bankruptcy?

Of course, these unions and workers later paid their own prices. Historically, Chrysler went bankrupt directly and was acquired by the Italian Fiat Group.

As a result, Fiat simply closed all factories in the United States, and the related technologies and production lines were either resold or moved back to Italy.

If the company changes its owner, then all the agreements signed with the union before will not count. Even if it counts, Fiat will not pay attention. Only idiots will pay. I am not afraid of you going on strike!

In addition, although Ford and GM did not go bankrupt and reorganize, they also made up their minds to close factories and remove workers. They didn't care no matter how they went on strike. Anyway, they were almost stopped. If these workers went on strike, they just needed to leave behind the workers who did not participate in the strike.

As a result, with the end of the financial crisis, nearly 3 million workers from the three auto companies were collectively unemployed. After that, these workers could hardly find jobs and could only rely on old capital or government food subsidies to live. In the end, the place where they gathered became a famous rust zone, paving the way for the rise of a certain commander in the future.

As for the union, the total number of members has dropped from 5 million at its peak to less than 300,000, because when any company recruits people, it will immediately cancel the work contract when it hears that the other party is a member of a certain union, without any hesitation.

Although the union eventually stopped, this was a loss-making ending. Workers had no jobs and could only live and wait for death. Enterprises lost the market and their own lives.

General Motors has also changed from being the best in the world to its current appearance, and has sold almost all the car brands in its hands, so it has barely survived.
Chapter completed!